Loading...
11 November 12, 2008 Commission85608 RECORDS RIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION MEETING AGENDA TIME: 9:30 a.m. DATE: Wednesday, November 12, 2008 LOCATION: BOARD ROOM County of Riverside Administrative Center 4080 Lemon Street, First Floor, Riverside Commissioners Chair: Jeff Stone 1 s` Vice Chair: Bob Magee 2' Vice Chair: Bob Buster Bob Buster, County of Riverside John F. Tavaglione, County of Riverside Jeff Stone, County of Riverside Roy Wilson, County of Riverside Marion Ashley, County of Riverside Bob Botts / Brenda Sales, City of Banning Roger Berg / Jeff Fox, City of Beaumont Joseph DeConinck / Robert Crain, City of Blythe John Chlebnik / Ray Quinto, City of Calimesa Mary Craton / John Zaitz, City of Canyon Lake Gregory S. Pettis / Kathleen DeRosa, City of Cathedral City Eduardo Garcia / Steven Hernandez, City of Coachella Eugene Montanez / Karen Spiegel, City of Corona Scott Matas / Russell Betts, City of Desert Hot Springs Robin Lowe / Eric McBride, City of Hemet Patrick J. Mullany / Larry Spicer, City of Indian Wells Michael H. Wilson / Melanie Fesmire, City of Indio Terry Henderson / Don Adolph, City of La Quinta Bob Magee / Robert L. Schiffner, City of Lake Elsinore Darcy Kuenzi / Scott Mann, City of Menifee Frank West / Charles White, City of Moreno Valley Rick Gibbs / Kelly Bennett, City of Murrieta Frank Hall / Malcolm Miller, City of Norco Dick Kelly / Cindy Finerty, City of Palm Desert Ginny Foat / Steve Pougnet, City of Palm Springs Daryl Busch / Mark Yarbrough, City of Perris Gordon Moller / Alan Seman, City of Rancho Mirage Steve Adams / Andy Melendrez, City of Riverside Chris Carlson / Jim Ayres, City of San Jacinto Ron Roberts / Jeff Comerchero, City of Temecula Scott Farnam / Bridgette Moore, City of Wildomar Raymond Wolfe, Governor's Appointee Anne Mayer, Executive Director John Standiford, Deputy Executive Director Comments are welcomed by the Commission. If you wish to provide comments to the Commission, please complete and submit a Speaker Card to the Clerk of the Board. 11.36.00 • RIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION www.rctc.org AGENDA* *Actions may be taken on any item /fisted on the agenda 9:30 a.m. Wednesday, November 12, 2008 BOARD ROOM County of Riverside Administrative Center 4080 Lemon Street, First Floor, Riverside, CA In compliance with the Brown Act and Government Code Section 54957.5, agenda materials distributed 72 hours prior to the meeting, which are public records relating to open session agenda items, will be available for inspection by members of the public prior to the meeting at the Commission office, 4080 Lemon Street, Third Floor, Riverside, CA, and on the Commission's website, www.rctc.org. In compliance with the Americans with Disabilities Act and Government Code Section 54954.2, if special assistance is needed to participate in a Commission meeting, please contact the Clerk of the Board at (951) 787-7141. Notification of at least 48 hours prior to meeting time will assist staff in assuring that reasonable arrangements can be made to provide accessibility at the meeting. 1. CALL TO ORDER 2. ROLL CALL 3. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE 4. PUBLIC COMMENTS — Each individual speaker is limited to speak three (3) continuous minutes or less. The Commission may, either at the direction of the Chair or by majority vote of the Commission, waive this three minute time limitation. Depending on the number of items on the Agenda and the number of speakers, the Chair may, at his/her discretion, reduce the time of each speaker to two (2) continuous minutes. In addition, the maximum time for public comment for any individual item or topic is thirty (30) minutes. Also, the Commission may terminate public comments if such comments become repetitious. Speakers may not yield their time to others without the consent of the Chair. Any written documents to be distributed or presented to the Commission shall be submitted to the Clerk of the Board. This policy applies to Public Comments and comments on Agenda Items. Under the Brown Act, the Board should not take action on or discuss matters raised during public comment portion of the agenda which are not listed on the agenda. Board members may refer such matters to staff for factual information or to be placed on the subsequent agenda for consideration. Riverside County Transportation Commission Agenda November 12, 2008 Page 2 5. APPROVAL OF. MINUTES — SEPTEMBER 22 AND OCTOBER 8, 2008 6. ADDITIONS/REVISIONS - The Commission may add an item to the Agenda after making a finding that there is a need to take immediate action on the item and that the item came to the attention of the Commission subsequent to the posting of the agenda. An action adding an item to the agenda requires 2/3 vote of the Commission. /f there are less than 2/3 of the Commission members present, adding an item to the agenda requires a unanimous vote. Added items will be placed for discussion at the end of the agenda. 7. CONSENT CALENDAR - All matters on the Consent Calendar will be approved in a single motion unless a Commissioner(s) requests separate action on specific item(s). Items pulled from the Consent Calendar will be placed for discussion at the end of the agenda. 7A. CLAIMS FILED AGAINST THE COMMISSION RESULTING FROM THE CHATSWORTH METROLINK INCIDENT Page 1 Overview This item is for the Commission to authorize legal counsel to reject all claims filed against the Commission resulting from the September 12, 2008, Chatsworth incident and tender defense of those claims to Metrolink. 7B. INTERNAL AUDIT REPORT ON ACCOUNTING/FINANCIAL FUNCTION Page 2 Overview This item is for the Commission to receive and file a report on the initial internal audit project relating to a high-level review of the Commission's Accounting and Finance function. 7C. SINGLE SIGNATURE AUTHORITY REPORT Page 7 Overview This item is for the Commission to receive and file the Single Signature Authority Report for the first quarter ended September 30, 2008. • Riverside County Transportation Commission Agenda November 12, 2008 Page 3 7D. AMENDMENT TO AGREEMENT FOR ON -CALL STRATEGIC PARTNERSHIP ADVISOR SERVICES Overview This item is for the Commission to: Page 9 1) Approve Agreement No. 06-66-026-06, Amendment No. 5 to Agreement No. 06-66-026-00, for On -Call Strategic Partnership Advisor Services with KPMG Corporate Finance, LLC (KPMG) to provide continuing on -call financial advisory services for the proposed State Route 91 and Interstate 15 corridor improvement projects for the amount of $250,000; and 2} Authorize the Chair, pursuant to legal counsel review, to execute the agreement on behalf of the Commission. 7E. TRANSPORTATION UNIFORM MITIGATION FEE REGIONAL ARTERIAL PROGRAM UPDATE Page 11 Overview This item is for the Commission to receive and file an update on the Transportation Uniform Mitigation Fee (TUMF) Regional Arterial program. 7F. RESOLUTION ELECTING TO HEAR RESOLUTION OF NECESSITY FOR THE INTERSTATE 215/STATE ROUTE 60 EAST JUNCTION PROJECT Page 17 Overview This item is for the Commission to adopt Resolution No. 08-026, "Resolution of the Riverside County Transportation Commission Electing to Hear Future Resolutions of Necessity for the High Occupancy Vehicle Lane Project for the 1-215/SR-60 East Junction and Designation of Commission General Counsel to Process Resolution of Necessity Packages for the Project". Riverside County Transportation Commission Agenda November 12, 2008 Page 4 7G. RESOLUTION ELECTING. TO HEAR RESOLUTION OF .NECESSITY FOR THE STATE ROUTE 74/G STREET TO INTERSTATE 215 INTERCHANGE PROJECT Page 20 Overview This item is for the Commission to adopt Resolution No. 08-027, "Resolution of the Riverside County Transportation Commission Electing to Hear Future Resolutions of Necessity for the SR-74/l-215 Project and Designation of Commission General Counsel to Process Resolution of Necessity Packages for the Project". 7H. AGREEMENT FOR THE CONSTRUCTION OF PHASE I - PERRIS MULTIMODAL TRANSPORTATION FACILITY IN THE CITY OF PERRIS Page 23 Overview This item is for the Commission to: 1) Award Agreement No. 09-33-046-00 to L A Engineering, Inc. for the construction of Phase I - Perris Multimodal Transportation Facility adjacent to C Street, between State Route 74 and San Jacinto Avenue in the city of Perris (Perris) in the amount of $4,904,841 plus a contingency amount of $495,159 for a total contract authorization of $5.4 million; 2) Authorize the Chair, pursuant to legal counsel review, to execute the agreement on behalf of the Commission; 3) Authorize the Executive Director or designee to approve work as may be required for the project; and 4) Authorize the Executive Director or designee pursuant to legal counsel review, to execute utility relocation and undergrounding agreements with Southern California Edison (SCE) and Verizon for a total not to exceed amount of $190,000 and $175,000 respectively. • • • • • • Riverside County Transportation Commission Agenda November 12, 2008 Page 5 71. AGREEMENT WITH CORNERSTONE STUDIOS TO PROVIDE ON -CALL DESIGN AND ENGINEERING SERVICES FOR THE COMMUTER RAIL STATION REHABILITATION AND MAINTENANCE PLAN Page 29 Overview This item is for the Commission to: 1) Award Agreement No. 09-33-009-00 to Cornerstone Studios to provide on -call design and engineering support services for the Commuter Rail Station Rehabilitation and Maintenance Plan (Plan), for a not to exceed amount of $300,000; 2) Authorize the Chair, pursuant to legal counsel review, to execute the agreement on behalf of the Commission. 7J. NORTH MAIN CORONA SATELLITE PARKING AGREEMENT Page 35 Overview This item is for the Commission to approve Agreement No. 09-33-47-00 with Princeland Properties International, Inc. (Princeland) to provide for over 200 leased parking spaces as a satellite parking lot during the remaining construction of the North Main Corona parking structure construction for a not to exceed amount of $48,000. 7K. COMMUTER RAIL PROGRAM UPDATE Page 37 Overview This item is for the Commission to receive and file an update on the Commuter Rail Program. 7L. STATE ROUTE 91 COMMUTER EXPRESS BUS — ROUTE 794 Overview Page 48 This item is for the Commission to approve continued demonstration funding of State Route 91 Commuter Express Bus — Route 794 service using Measure A Commuter Assistance Program funds in an amount not to exceed $142,000. Riverside County Transportation Commission Agenda November 12, 2008 Page 6 7M. UPDATE ON PORTS OF LOS ANGELES AND LONG BEACH • EXPANSION PROJECTS Page 57 Overview This item is for the Commission to receive an update on the San Pedro Ports' proposed expansion projects. 8. ITEM(S) PULLED FROM CONSENT CALENDAR AGENDA 9. SALES TAX REVENUES UPDATE Overview This item is for the Commission to: Page 54 1) Receive and file the report on Measure A and Local Transportation Fund (LTF) revenues; and 2) Receive and file the sales tax analysis for Quarter 2, 2008. 10. PUBLIC HEARING — MID COUNTY PARKWAY DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT/DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT Page 68 Overview This item is for the Commission to receive public comments on the Mid County Parkway (MCP) draft environmental impact report/draft environmental impact statement (DEIR/DEIS). 11. COMMISSIONERS / EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR REPORT Overview This item provides the opportunity for the Commissioners and the Executive Director to report on attended meetings/conferences and any other items related to Commission activities. 12. ADJOURNMENT The next Commission meeting is scheduled to be held at 9:30 a.m., Wednesday, December 10, 2008, Board Room, County of Riverside Administrative Center, 4080 Lemon Street, First Floor, Riverside. • • RIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION ROLL CALL NOVEMBER 12, 2008 Present Absent County of River -aide, -District County of Riverside, District II Count County of Riverside, District Courx�:. City of Banning City of Beaumont City of Blythe City of Calimesa City of Canyon Lake City of r, City of Coachella O City of Corona ,I 0 City of Desert Hot Springs O City of I-fe City of Indian Wells City of lndi�xF _ City of La Quinta ,� O City of Lake' Elation 0 City of Menifee O City of Moreno Valley 0 City of Murrieta City Of Norc City of Palm Desert City of Palm City of Perris City of Rancho City of Riverside City of San-: City of Temecula City of Governor's Appointee, Caltrans District 8 RIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION MEETING COMMISSIONER SIGN -IN SHEET NOVEMBER 12, 2008 NAME AGENCY E MAIL ADDRESS }2� h Fez.. 6 t--iZ,i, ,6ttA/ ,4,1,,,--f' To 1+ N 2 A 1 T Z Ca,K it 4f 7< c__ 1 A- 1. CGS ( /TC f /� _� 7 y � \ r/�; l-Y A-- re c..ck ft Cj�L les Z ‘i.717le "eel,. er,a� //e- y K. 7 6 4 s v 44 r.z=___-: 7e�} ` a ors /1 l &.‘41 tc �4_4 .5 ,/„ '2 6--t5 < -e__ ra 1_34,e5ev-----f— '-e)( Y i'7oL CA"L Ti-,v S m2vr®,! 1/4101/n/ 6://1-EB/0/K CAL /11 -5A /Vie 11-1--e 4-- )/LS aNJ D c.� IR b �€ � /��lila 42-,f-477 AMfIq .) /e9P�.-)Amy Fifi-r- /59/)/ SfRijOss &/vim'i„,_ / ti e �� AT�S fl ,_sr-, ,! r 5S0s . 10, y� �'�0- M��, ° • • • RIVERS/DE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION SPECIAL MEETING MINUTES Wednesday, September 22, 2008 1) CALL TO ORDER The special meeting of the Riverside County Transportation Commission was called to order by Chair Jeff Stone at 11:00 a.m., in Conference Room A at the County of Riverside Administrative Center, 4080 Lemon Street, Third Floor, Riverside, California, 92501. 2) ROLL CALL Commissioners/Alternates Present Commissioners Absent Steve Adams Marion Ashley Roger Berg Bob Botts Daryl Busch Bob Buster Mary Craton John Chlebnik Joseph DeConinck Frank Hall Eduardo Garcia Terry Henderson Robin Lowe Bob Magee Scott Matas Jeff Stone Frank West Chris Carlson Scott Farnam Ginny Foat Rick Gibbs Dick Kelly Jeff Miller Gordon Moller Patrick J. Mullany Gregory Pettis Ron Roberts Karla Sutliff John F. Tavaglione Michael H. Wilson Roy Wilson 3) PUBLIC COMMENTS There were no requests from the public to speak. 4) ADDITIONS/REVISIONS There were no additions or revisions to the agenda. Riverside County Transportation Commission Minutes September 22, 2008 Page 2 5) EFFECTS OF LEHMAN BROTHERS BANKRUPTCY ON DEBT FINANCING PROGRAM Theresia Trevino, Chief Financial Officer, and Dan Wiles, Fieldman Rolapp Financial Services LLC, presented the impact of the Lehman Brothers Holdings bankruptcy on the Commission and the Commission's options. The Commission discussed the available options and the associated benefits and risks. MIS/C to: 1) Receive and file a report on the effects of the bankruptcy filing by Lehman Brothers (Lehman) on the Commission's debt financing program: 2) Authorize the Chief Financial Officer to pursue options related to the termination of the forward -starting interest rate swap with Lehman as well as the assignment of commercial paper dealers; and 3) Adopt Resolution No. 08-025, 'Resolution of the Riverside County Transportation to Authorize the Executive Director or designee to Enter into a Replacement Swap Agreement" and approve other documents related to the replacement swap transaction. 6) ADJOURNMENT There being no further business for consideration by the Riverside County Transportation Commission, the meeting adjourned at 1 1:30 a.m. Respectfully submitted, / )1-4"•."-1-4-- Jennifer Harmon Clerk of the Board • • • RIVERS/DE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION MINUTES Wednesday, October 8, 2008 1. CALL TO ORDER The Riverside County Transportation Commission was called to order by Chair Jeff Stone at 9:32 a.m., in the Board Room at the County of Riverside Administrative Center, 4080 Lemon Street, Riverside, California, 92501. 2. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE At this time, Commissioner Rick Gibbs led the Commission in a flag salute. 3. ROLL CALL Commissioners/Alternates Present Commissioners Absent Steve Adams Marion Ashley Roger Berg Daryl Busch Bob Buster Chris Carlson Mary Craton Bill Davis Joseph DeConinck Scott Farnam Eduardo Garcia Rick Gibbs Frank Hall Terry Henderson 4. PUBLIC COMMENTS Robin Lowe Bob Magee Scott Matas Gordon Moller Eugene Montanez Patrick J. Mullany Gregory Pettis Steve Pougnet Ron Roberts Jeff Stone Karla Sutliff Frank West Michael H. Wilson Roy Wilson Bob Botts Dick Kelly John F. Tavaglione Garry Grant, Meadowbrook area resident, expressed strong concern about the use of bonds and stated that it is the Commission's responsibility to wisely invest public funds in its efforts to advance projects. Chair Stone briefly explained the bonding process and benefits, noting that it is a public process. Riverside County Transportation Commission Minutes October 8, 2008 Page 2 5. APPROVAL OF MINUTES — SEPTEMBER 10, 2008 M/S/C (M. Wilson/Carlson) to approve the minutes of September 10, 2008, as submitted. 6. ADDITIONS/REVISIONS John Standiford, Deputy Executive Director, requested that Agenda Item 10, "State and Federal Legislative Update", be taken before Agenda Item 9, "2008 Funding Strategy: A Blueprint for Advancing Projects". 7. CONSENT CALENDAR John Standiford noted that Agenda Item 7F, "Western County Universal Call for Projects Jobs Access Reverse Commute, New Freedom, and Measure A Specialized Transit Grant Awards", reflects the most significant investment in specialized transit the Commission has ever made. It sets the funding blueprint for Western Riverside County. M/S/C (Adams/Buster) to approve the following Consent Calendar items: 7A. ADOPTION OF ORDINANCE NO. 08-001 TO AMEND THE ADMINISTRATIVE CODE TO REFLECT THE DISBANDMENT OF THE TRANSIT POLICY COMMITTEE Adopt Ordinance 08-001, "An Ordinance Amending the Riverside County Transportation Commission Administrative Code", to reflect changes related to the disbandment of the Transit Policy Committee. 7B. ANNUAL LOCAL TRANSPORTATION FUND PLANNING ALLOCATION TO WESTERN RIVERSIDE COUNCIL OF GOVERNMENTS FOR FISCAL YEAR 2008/09 Approve an allocation of Local Transportation Fund (LTF) planning funds in the amount of $577,500 to the Western Riverside Council of Governments (WRCOG) to support transportation planning programs and functions as identified in the attached work program. • • • • • Riverside County Transportation Commission Minutes October 8, 2008' Page 3 7C. ON -CALL LIST FOR ENGINEERING AND ENVIRONMENTAL SERVICES FOR MEASURE A HIGHWAY PROJECTS 1) Approve the ranked list of consultant firms for placement on the on -call list for engineering and environmental services for Measure A highway projects. The list will be valid for a one-year duration; and 2) Authorize staff to enter into negotiations with the firms on the list as new consultant services are required. Final contracts will be individually returned to the Commission for approval. 7D. AMENDMENT TO AGREEMENT WITH STV INCORPORATED TO PROVIDE PLANNING AND PRELIMINARY ENGINEERING SERVICES FOR THE PERRIS VALLEY LINE GREENWAY CORRIDOR TRANSPORTATION ENHANCEMENT PROJECT 1) Approve Agreement No. 07-33-123-02, Amendment No. 2 to Agreement No. 07-33-123-00, with STV Incorporated (STV) for conception planning and preliminary engineering services for the Perris Valley Line (PVL) Greenway Corridor Transportation Enhancement (TE) project in the amount of $231,007, plus a contingency amount of $23,993 for a not to exceed amount of $255,000; 21 Authorize the Chair, pursuant to legal counsel review, to execute the agreement on behalf of the Commission; and 3) Authorize the Executive Director or designee, pursuant to legal counsel review, to approve the use of the contingency as may be required for the project. 7E. COMMUTER RAIL PROGRAM UPDATE Receive and file an update on the Commuter Rail Program. Riverside County Transportation Commission Minutes October 8, 2008 Page 4 7F. WESTERN COUNTY UNIVERSAL CALL FOR PROJECTS JOBS ACCESS REVERSE COMMUTE, NEW FREEDOM AND MEASURE A SPECIALIZED TRANSIT GRANT AWARDS 1) Approve Agreement No. 09-26-022-00 with the Partnership for Independent Living for the Transportation Reimbursement and Information Project (TRIP) program in the amount of $1,147,218 in Measure A Specialized Transit funds; 2) Approve Agreement No. 09-26-025-00 with the Riverside Transit Agency (RTA) for the extended late night service project in the amount of $890,024 in Job Access Reverse Commute (JARC) funds and $838,750 in Measure A Specialized Transit grant funds; 3) Approve Agreement No. 09-26-026-00 with Care -A -Van Services, Inc. for the Care -A -Van Services, Inc. in the amount of $695,000 in Measure A Specialized Transit grant funds; 4) Approve Agreement No. 09-26-023-00 with Care Connexxus, Inc. for the Specialized Shuttle project in the amount of $70,000 in New Freedom grant funds and $455,000 in Measure A Specialized Transit grant funds; 5) Approve Agreement No. 09-26-024-00 with Operation Safe House for the Main Street Transitional Living program in the amount of $38,700 in Measure A Specialized Transit grant funds; 6) Approve Agreement No. 09-26-027-00 with the Volunteer Center of Riverside County for the Transportation Access program in the amount of $406,146 in Measure A Specialized Transit grant funds; 7) Approve Agreement No. 09-26-028-00 to Blindness Support Services for the Travel Training program in the amount of $187,997 in New Freedom grant funds and $1 12,797 in Measure A Specialized Transit grant funds; 8) Approve Agreement No. 09-26-029-00 with the Friends of Moreno Valley Senior Center for the Mo-Van transit service in the amount of $123,000 in Measure A Specialized Transit grant funds; 9) Approve Agreement No. 09-26-030-00 with RTA for the CommuterLink service, routes 212 and 214, in the amount of $272,828 in JARC grant funds and $829,078 in Measure A Specialized Transit grant funds; • • • Riverside County Transportation Commission Minutes October 8, 2008 Page 5 10) Approve Agreement No. 09-26-031-00 with Court Appointed Special Advocates for Riverside County, Inc. (C.A.S.A.) for Riverside County for the Specialized Transportation Service for Abused Children program in the amount of $98,078 in Measure A Specialized Transit grant funds; 11) Approve Agreement No. 09-26-032-00 with Beaumont Adult School for the Low Income Adult Student Transportation project in the amount of $37,000 in Measure A Specialized Transit grant funds; 12) Approve Agreement No. 09-26-033-00 with Boys and Girls Clubs of Southwest County for the Before and After School Transportation program in the amount of $113,468 in JARC grant funds and $348,673 in Measure A Specialized Transit grant funds; 13) Approve Agreement No. 09-26-034-00 with Jefferson Transitional Programs (JTP) for the Jefferson Shuttle project in the amount of $69,620 in New Freedom grant funds and $44,044 in Measure A Specialized Transit grant funds; 14) Approve Agreement No. 09-26-035-00 with city of Norco Parks Department for the Norco Senior Shuttle Service program in the amount of $153,443 in Measure A Specialized Transit grant funds; 15) Approve Agreement No. 09-26-036-00 with Inland Aids Project for the Inland Aids Project Transportation program in the amount of $306,500 in Measure A Specialized Transit grant funds; 16) Approve Agreement No. 09-26-037-00 with Wildomar Senior Community for the Senior Community Transportation program in the amount of $25,692 in New Freedom grant funds; 17) Approve Agreement No. 09-26-038-00 with the Riverside County Regional Medical Center for the Specialized Non -Emergency Medical Transportation program in the amount of $220,267 in New Freedom grant funds and $366,573 in Measure A Specialized Transit grant funds; and 18) Authorize the Chair, pursuant to legal counsel review, to execute the agreements on behalf of the Commission. Riverside County Transportation Commission Minutes October 8, 2008 Page 6 • 7G. FEDERAL FISCAL YEAR 2008/09 FEDERAL TRANSIT ADMINISTRATION'S SECTION 5310 PROGRAM 1) Adopt the FFY 2008/09 Federal Transit Administration's (FTA) Section 5310 Riverside County project rankings as recommended by the Local Review Committee; 2) Include the projects in the Regional Transportation Improvement Plan (RTIP); and 3) Certify by Resolution No. 08-024 "Resolution of the Riverside County Transportation Commission Certifying Project Consistency with the Regional Transportation Plan" that the projects are derived from a locally developed, coordinated public transit -human services transportation plan. 7H. RIVERSIDE TRANSIT AGENCY'S REQUEST FOR LOCAL TRANSPORTATION FUND ADVANCE ALLOCATION AND AMENDMENT TO FISCAL YEAR 2008/2009 SHORT RANGE TRANSIT PLAN 1) Approve Riverside Transit Agency's (RTA) request to accommodate the advance of Local Transportation Fund (LTF) funds in the amount of $10,783,778; and 2) Approve an additional LTF allocation for FY 2008/09 for $53,289 and amend RTA's FY 2008/09 Short Range Transit Plan (SRTP) to accommodate the proposal to restructure routes 32 and 42. 71. FISCAL YEAR 2009-13 MEASURE A FIVE-YEAR CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PLAN FOR LOCAL STREETS AND ROADS FOR THE CITY OF MURRIETA Approve the FY 2009-13 Measure A Five -Year Capital Improvement Plan (CIP) for Local Streets and Roads for the city of Murrieta (Murrieta) as submitted. 7J. MEASURE A TRANSPORTATION IMPROVEMENT PLAN AMENDMENT CORRECTION Approve a correction to the Measure A TIP Amendment Resolution No. 08-023, "A Resolution of the Riverside County Transportation Commission Initiating an Amendment of the Riverside County Expenditure Plan and Retail Transaction and Use Tax Ordinance (Ordinance No 88-1) and Making Finding of Necessity for Such Amendment". • • • • • Riverside County Transportation Commission Minutes October 8, 2008 Page 7 8. REPLACEMENT SWAP TRANSACTION UPDATE Theresia Trevino, Chief Financial Officer, provided background information and an update to the Commission on the replacement swap transaction. In response to Commissioner Robin Lowe's question regarding declines in the world markets and potential impacts to the Commission, Theresia Trevino replied that she is not aware that Deutsche Bank has had any downgrades in its credit rating. She explained that if there is a downgrade below a certain level, it would require Deutsche Bank to post collateral as stipulated in the agreement. In response to Commissioner Steve Adams' question regarding consideration of terminating the swap transaction, Theresia Trevino replied there is a type of bond offering that is anticipated for next fall or early winter that could present an option to terminate the swap. In response to Commissioner Eugene Montanez's request for clarification about the federal government's involvement in commercial paper, Theresia Trevino replied that she needs to thoroughly review this issue, however, she believes it could be a benefit to the Commission. Commissioner Gibbs stated that he advocated caution when the Commission first considered the swap transaction and suggested the Commission take a very jaundiced view of any further swap transactions. However, he accepts the need to expeditiously accommodate the replacement swap transaction. M/S/C (Adams/Lowe) to: 1) Receive and file a report on the termination of the $85 million with Lehman Brothers Derivative Products Inc. (LBDP) and execution of a replacement swap transaction with Deutsche Bank AG, New York Branch (Deutsche Bank); 2) Approve Agreement No. 05-19-510-02, Amendment No. 2 to Agreement No. 05-19-510-00, with Orrick, Herrington & Sutcliffe LLP (Orrick) in the amount of $60,000 for bond counsel services related to additional services related to the termination of the LBDP swap and the commercial paper program; 3) Approve Agreement No. 09-19-044-00 with Fieldman Rolapp Financial Services LLC in the amount of $30,000 for financial advisory services related to additional services related to the termination of the LBDP; Riverside County Transportation Commission Minutes October 8, 2008 Page 8 4) Authorize the Chair, pursuant to legal counsel review, to execute the agreements on behalf of the Commission; and 5) Approve budget adjustments of $3,453,000 and $90,000 to the FY 2008/09 budget for increased interest expenditures and for legal and professional service expenditures, respectively. 10. STATE AND FEDERAL LEGISLATIVE UPDATE Aaron Hake, Government Relations Manager, provide an update on state and federal legislative issues, highlighting the following areas: • Proposition 42 - protected; • State Transit Assistance Fund - cuts; • SB 375 (Steinberg) - signed; • SB 974 (Lowenthal) - vetoed; • AB 3021 (Nava) - vetoed; • AB 1915 (Jeffries) - signed; • SB 1316 (Correa) - signed; • AB 1954 (Jeffries) - signed; • Highway Trust Fund; • Rail Safety Legislation - passed; • Appropriations - stalled; • Good Movement Legislation - introduced; • Preparations for new federal authorization; • SB 375; • AB 32; and • Container fee legislation. Chair Stone stated both SB 1316 and AB 1954 are very important to this region and suggested inviting the both legislators to a future Commission meeting to express the Commission's gratitude. M/S/C (Adams/Lowe) to receive and file an update on state and federal legislation. 9. 2008 FUNDING STRATEGY: A BLUEPRINT FOR ADVANCING PROJECTS Tanya Love, Goods Movement Manager, presented the draft 2008 Funding Strategy for Advancing Grade Separation Projects within the county of Riverside, addressing the following areas: • • Riverside County Transportation Commission Minutes October 8, 2008 Page 9 • Goods movement overview; • Blueprint objective; • Priority crossings; • 2008 funding summary; • Priority Tiers A, B, and C; • Benefits of grade separation; • Health impacts of PM and ozone pollution for freight transport; • Funding shortfall; • Commission and local agencies proactive role; • Voluntary container premium; • Legislative platform; and • Key factors for success. John Standiford added that the document and dvd will be finalized so that the Commission is prepared for discussions with Congress. Commissioner Bob Buster suggested the Commission focus on funding grade separation projects with costs below $40 million and make the case that higher cost projects at the $100 million range are too costly to locally sustain and need state and federal funding assistance. Chair Stone suggested reprioritizing the grade separation projects that the Commission can afford. John Standiford concurred with Chair Stone's comment. He explained there have been changes in the economy where the Commission may need to adapt some of its current strategy. Staff will continue to work on a cooperative basis with the local jurisdictions and bring any revisions or adjustments to the Commission. Tanya Love clarified Priority Tiers A and B are fully funded. She concurred with Commissioner Buster's comment that the Commission needs state and federal assistance with the high cost projects. Commissioner Montanez stated the McKinley Avenue grade separation project in the city of Corona is one of the highest priority projects and the most expensive. He suggested fully evaluating all funding options before reprioritizing projects. At Commissioner Buster's request, Tanya Love provided an update on the TCIF program, noting the California Transportation Commission (CTC) confirmed all baseline agreements and documentation are acceptable. M/S/C (R. Wilson/Adams) to: Riverside County Transportation Commission Minutes October 8, 2008 Page 10 1) Receive the 2008 Funding Strategy: A Blueprint for Advancing Projects; and 2) Direct staff to finalize the funding strategy. 11. ITEM(S) PULLED FROM CONSENT CALENDAR FOR DISCUSSION There were no agenda items pulled from the Consent Calendar. 12. COMMISSIONERS/EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR'S REPORT 12A. John Standiford announced that: • State budget has been approved; • CTC will meet in the County of Riverside Administrative Center Board Room on October 29-30. A reception will be held on October 29 from 5:30 p.m. to 7:30 p.m. at the Mission Inn; • Mid County Parkway public meetings will be held on October 28-30, and public hearings will be held on November 6 and 12; • Mobility 21 meeting will be held on October 21 with a keynote presentation from Congressman Ken Calvert; and • Michael Blomquist was promoted to Toll Program Director. 12B. Commissioner Steve Adams announced the National Multimodal Transportation Steering Committee will hold hearings on October 22-23 at the Mission Inn. 12C. Commissioner Gibbs briefed the Commission on the recent Interstate 15 Regional Partnership meeting. 12D. Commissioner Karla Sutliff announced the appointment of Raymond Wolfe as the Caltrans District 8 Director. Additionally; a booklet on the 60/91 /215 interchange project was handed out to the Commissioners. 12E. Commissioner Roger Berg announced the city of Beaumont will hold a groundbreaking ceremony for the Mobile Creek Bridge on Oak Valley Parkway on November 1. 13. CLOSED SESSION • • • Riverside County Transportation Commission Minutes October 8, 2008 Page 11 13A. CONFERENCE WITH LEGAL COUNSEL: ANTICIPATED LITIGATION Significant exposure to litigation pursuant to subdivision (b) of Government Code Section 54956.9. Multiple potential cases. 13B. CONFERENCE INVOLVING A JOINT POWERS AGENCY Southern California Regional Rail Authority (SCRRA) Discussion will concern: Pursuant to Government Code Section 54956.96(a)(1)(B) — Anticipated litigation arising out of the September 12, 2008 collision between a Metrolink train and a Union Pacific freight train on the Ventura County Line, near the city of Chatsworth, CA; Multiple potential cases. Name of local agency representative on joint powers agency board: Frank West, Ron Roberts, John Chlebnik (alternate), and Daryl Busch (alternate). There were no announcements for Closed Session items. • 14. ADJOURNMENT There being no further business for consideration by the Riverside County Transportation Commission, the meeting adjourned at 11:01 a.m. The next Commission meeting is scheduled to be held at 9:30 a.m., Wednesday, November 12, 2008, in the Board Room at the County of Riverside Administrative Center, 4080 Lemon Street, Riverside, California, 92501. Respectfully submitted, Jennifer Harmon Clerk of the Board • • • • RIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION DATE: November 12, 2008 TO: Riverside County Transportation Commission FROM: Jennifer Harmon, Office and Board Services Manager THROUGH: Anne Mayer, Executive Director SUBJECT: Claims Filed Against the Commission Resulting Chatsworth Metrolink Incident From the STAFF RECOMMENDATION: This item is for the Commission to authorize legal counsel to reject all claims filed against the Commission resulting from the September 12, 2008, Chatsworth incident and tender defense of those claims to Metrolink. BACKGROUND INFORMATION: On September 12, 2008, a Metrolink train was involved in an incident with a Union Pacific Railroad freight train on the Ventura County rail line in the city of Chatsworth. The Commission, as a member of the Metrolink Joint Powers Agency, has received one claim as a result of the incident. Metrolink is defending the action, including any claims brought directly against its member agencies. Legal counsel is asking for authority to reject all claims filed against the Commission resulting for the incident and to tender defense of those claims to Metrolink. Agenda Item 7A 1 • • RIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION DATE: November 12, 2008 TO: Riverside County Transportation Commission FROM: Audit Ad Hoc Committee Theresia Trevino, Chief Financial Officer THROUGH: Anne Mayer, Executive Director SUBJECT: Internal Audit Report on Accounting/Financial Function AUDIT AO HOC COMMITTEE AND STAFF RECOMMENDATION: This item is for the Commission to receive and file a report on the initial internal audit project relating to a high-level review of the Commission's Accounting and Finance function. BACKGROUND INFORMATION: At its October 2007 meeting, the Commission approved the selection of KPMG LLP, (KPMG) to support the Commission's internal audit function. An agency -wide risk assessment of the Commission was conducted, which included extensive interviews with staff, legal counsel, and Chair Jeff Stone. Based on the risk assessment, an internal audit plan for the next three years was developed, including recommendations for future internal audit projects. In July 2008, the risk assessment and internal audit plan were presented to and approved by the Audit Ad Hoc Committee, as the Commission's audit committee or its equivalent. The initial internal audit project was a high-level review of the Commission's Accounting and Finance function. KPMG's work was performed under the direction and oversight of the Commission, which was responsible for establishing the engagement objectives and approving the nature, timing, and extent of engagement activities. One moderate risk finding regarding W-9 forms from vendors and two process improvement recommendations were identified. The process improvements related to vendor master file maintenance and vendor invoice reviews. Attached is a report that includes an executive summary of this project and the observations, recommendations, and management's responses. Staff has reviewed the report that documents the results of KPMG's engagement activities and recommends that the Audit Ad Hoc Committee approve the report. Attachment: RCTC Internal Audit Report on Accounting/Financial Function Agenda Item 7B 2 • • • RCTC INTERNAL AUDIT Accounting/Financial Function October 20, 2008 Riverside County Transportation Commission Ad Hoc Committee Riverside, California Members of the Ad Hoc Committee: We have performed a high-level internal audit of Riverside County Transportation Commission's (RCTC) Accounting and Finance function as of August 2008. Fieldwork was conducted between August 4, 2008 and September 30, 2008. Our findings were discussed with Michele Cisneros, Accounting and Human Resources Manager, on October 15, 2008. Executive Summary The Accounting and Finance function is comprised of four people and is responsible for financial reporting, accounts payable, accounts receivable, investments and cash management, general accounting, payroll, and vendor management. The function reports directly to Anne Hallberg, Accounting Supervisor; Michele Cisneros, Accounting and Human Resources Manager; and ultimately to Theresia Trevino, Chief Financial Officer (CFO). The scope of this review included a high-level walk through of key areas and focused on: • Accounts payable • Cash disbursements • Bank reconciliation • Budgeting and financial analysis • Investment management During the course of our review, we identified one moderate risk finding and two process improvement recommendations. The moderate risk finding related to lack of W-9 forms for three of 18 vendors reviewed. The W-9 form is required for tax reporting purposes and management will be securing W-9's for those three vendors identified in observation #1. Additionally, the department will review the vendor files to ensure that a valid W-9 has been obtained from all active vendors. Our detailed report follows: AUDIT OBJECTIVES AND SCOPE We conducted a Financial/Accounting Check -Up in August/September 2008. The objectives of the audit were as follows: • Review Accounts Payable process to determine whether vendor invoices are: appropriately approved; paid accurately; and — processed in a timely manner. • Review Cash Disbursement function to evaluate if: — checks are issued in accordance with policies and procedures providing for effective segregation of duties between issuance and approval; and — check stock is adequately secured. • Assess Bank Reconciliation process to determine if financial records are accurate and reconciling items are addressed in a timely manner. • Review Budgeting and Financial Analysis process to determine if effective controls exist to provide for adequate planning and monitoring of financial activities. • Evaluate Investment process to determine if existing controls are operating effectively to ensure that investments are in compliance with regulations and internal policies. Audit scope included the following: • Accounts Payable — Invoices paid from January 1, 2008 to June 30, 2008 • Cash Disbursement — Checks issued from January 1, 2008 to June 30, 2008 • Budgeting and Financial Analysis — Fiscal Year 2008/2009 • Investments — All investments processed from January 1, 2008 to June 30, 2008 • Bank Reconciliations — Process walk through focusing on July 2008. To achieve our objectives we performed the following procedures: • Interviewed process owners for areas and functions under review; • Reviewed relevant policies and procedures; • Identified risks within the processes and identified controls designed to mitigate these risks; and • 4 • • • Tested a limited 'sample of applicable transactions to determine if controls were operating effectively. OBSERVATIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS Based on the results of our interviews with the personnel responsible for the Accounts Payable/Cash Disbursement, Budgeting, and Investment functions; review of the documentation pertaining to these processes; and testing of controls surrounding the process, it appears that controls within these processes are designed appropriately and operate effectively as management has intended. However, we noted certain opportunities for improvement in the Accounts Payable/Cash Disbursement process as listed below. Observation #1- W-9 Form Maintenance (Moderate Risk) According to the Accounts Payable/Cash Disbursement Policy, all vendors should have a W-9 form on file. However, based on the result of our testing, three out of 18 vendors that required a W-9 form, did not have one on file. RCTC did not have W-9s on file for the City National Bank, SC Engineering, and Coachella Valley Association of Governments. Per Michele Cisneros, Accounting Manager, RCTC has been conducting business with these three vendors for many years. The W-9 form was not requested at the inception of these vendor relationships, due to a lack of understanding of the tax reporting requirements. Staff began requiring W-9 forms for most new vendors in 2001. The W-9 form supports legitimacy of the vendor as well as it provides the most up-to- date information about the vendor, including tax identification number. Recommendation #1 Management should review all active vendors' files to ensure a W-9 form is on file and contains recent information. Consideration should be given to updating the vendor information, including the W-9 form on a periodic basis (every three years). Management Response #1 Management concurs with this recommendation and is in the process of obtaining W-9's for the vendors as noted above and will carefully review all vendor records for W-9 compliance. Additionally, staff has attended training beginning in 2007 for W-9 compliance and will continue to do so annually. Observation #2- Vendor Master File Maintenance (Process Improvement) We noted that the system generated list of vendors provided by Michele Cisneros included 1,147 vendors. However, based on the list of payments made to vendors prior to June 30, 2008, it appears that only 359 active vendors were paid during the period under review. Although adequate controls exist to provide for accurate payments to legitimate vendors, outdated information in the financial system may create opportunities for human errors allowing for payments to illegitimate vendors. Recommendation #2 Management should review the vendor master file on an annual basis and remove information pertaining to inactive vendors. Management Response #2 Management concurs with the recommendation; however, given the current financial system environment, the purging of old vendor records would lead to the elimination of accessing vendor data in the future, should the need arise. The Commission will be implementing a new financial system that should address this issue. Through the process identified in recommendation #3, management can alleviate payments to illegitimate vendors until the new financial system is implemented. Observation #3 — Vendor Invoice Review (Process Improvement) Per current policy, all vendor invoices are reviewed by the Accounts Payable Supervisor as well as the Accounting Manager and/or the CFO. This process may be inefficient as the management review appears to be duplicative and may not add value. Recommendation #3 Management should consider limiting Accounting Manager's review and the CFO's review to invoices within certain thresholds or review of a sample of invoices. Should repetitive issues with invoices be identified during these reviews, the root causes of the issues should be determined and addressed to provide for an efficient process. Management Response #3 Management does not fully concur with this recommendation, as the level of review by management is not as detailed as the Accounting Supervisor's review. Given the complex nature of the Commission's project funding and the volume of project activity, management feels that some redundancy provides additional controls to ensure proper invoice funding, project/account coding, and resolution of vendor issues before making a payment. Management will continue to reassess the level of review for each invoice by management. Theresia Trevino Chief Financial Officer 6 • RIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION DATE: November 12, 2008 TO: Riverside County Transportation Commission FROM: Budget and Implementation Committee Michele Cisneros, Accounting and Human Resources Manager THROUGH: Anne Mayer, Executive Director SUBJECT: Single Signature Authority Report BUDGET AND IMPLEMENTATION COMMITTEE AND STAFF RECOMMENDATION: This item is for the Commission to receive and file the Single Signature Authority Report for the first quarter ended September 30, 2008. BACKGROUND INFORMATION: The attached report details all professional services and administrative contracts that have been executed for the first quarter ended September 30, 2008, under the Single Signature Authority granted to the Executive Director by the Commission. The unused capacity at September 30, 2008 is $470,000. Attachment: Single Signature Authority Report as of September 30, 2008 Agenda Item 7C 7 8 00'000'OLVS 00'0 00'000'0£ •431ie4b 1814 ay; 41 pays!! syaeJyuoo mau syuasaidal ear¢ PePan 3040N Rq pemevaa oJdus0 alaliON i e�uaw (eiapay cN�?1Q� 3 i N `(aeiluos Ps��y4g4�p �0 y�a(ad �5 > P3ke1's Bulnay lumriouti-64, p a,Irf Ru6ls,als'34 lygilS e1-BfR 3e yua3luddlsAtjei3�aW w0a 00'000'Of 00'D 00'OOQ'Of lg0uayod eyy 6y;payeiai @q?l(11aF6utunsuo0 1N110WV lOVIAIN00 ONINIVYM1 • 1Nf10Wtl OIVd 00'000'009S 1Nf10Wtl 10 V211N00 lb'NI°01210 S301A113S d0 NOLLd1210S3O 800Z'OE aaqumdes d0 S`d A.LINOHMIV aNnives MONIS 1Ntl1V1SN00 RIVERS/DE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION DATE: November 12, 2008 TO: Riverside County Transportation Commission FROM: Budget and Implementation Committee Michael Blomquist, Toll Program Director THROUGH: Anne Mayer, Executive Director SUBJECT: Amendment to Agreement for On -Call Strategic Partnership Advisor Services BUDGET AND IMPLEMENTATION COMMITTEE AND STAFF RECOMMENDATION: This item is for the Commission to: 1) Approve Agreement No. 06-66-026-06, Amendment No. 5 to Agreement No. 06-66-026-00, for On -Call Strategic Partnership Advisor Services with KPMG Corporate Finance, LLC (KPMG) to provide continuing on -call financial advisory services for the proposed State Route 91 and Interstate 1.5 corridor improvement projects for the amount of $250,000; and 2) Authorize the Chair, pursuant to legal counsel review, to execute the agreement on behalf of the Commission. BACKGROUND INFORMATION: In February 2006, the Commission entered into an agreement for the purpose of providing Strategic Partnership Advisor Services with KPMG for project financing alternatives and evaluation of potential toll road corridors in Riverside County. The project approval and environmental document (PA/ED) work phase completion for the SR-91 and 1-15 corridor improvement projects is scheduled for 2011 and 2012, respectively, under separate agreements with engineering firms. The continued services of KPMG is desirable for support of the PA/ED work and to assist the Commission in successfully moving these projects forward into the design, construction, and operation phases. The major tasks that KMPG will provide are as follows: a) Provide financial analysis as it relates to assessing project feasibility and subsequent transaction structuring. b) Periodic update of financial analyses to confirm viability of the SR-91 and 1-15 corridor improvement projects as cost and project scope are further Agenda Item 7D 9 developed. This analysis may include review of revenue, cost, and schedule inputs from the technical team, modifications to the financing strategy, and changes to the project phasing or scope and sensitivity runs to determine the impact of variances in demand, construction costs, and general inflation. c) Provide input to the milestone schedules, detailed time lines and work plans for the SR-91 and I-15 corridor improvement projects, taking into account project status (environmental, design, etc.), funding priorities and constraints, project feasibility, internal and external resources, and market resources. d) Provide research and analysis relating to policy development, procurement process design, proposal evaluation, and tolling framework. e) Review and provide input to project documents, including for example, applications for environmental approval, funding programs, and project description. f) Review and provide input to resolution of key programmatic and project - specific issues and decisions. g) During this "pre -launch" phase, develop and structure a procurement and contract strategy suited to the specific project, including the procurement process, evaluation criteria, risk allocation, contract terms, public -private partnership suitable technical provisions and a long-term contract/project administrative approach. The financial advisory services outlined above would be provided by KPMG for $250,000, which is anticipated to be used as follows: FY 2008/09 - $100,000; FY 2009/10 - $75,000; and FY 2010/11 - $75,000. The FY 2008/09 amount has been included in the current year's fiscal budget. This will bring the total contract amount to $895,000. Staff recommends amending Agreement No. 06-66-026-00 for additional compensation of $250,000. Financial Information In Fiscal Year Budget: I Yes N/A Year: 1FY 2008/09 FY 2009/10+ Amount: $100,000 $150,000 Source of Funds: I Commercial Paper Budget Ad ustment: No N/A GLA No.: 303 31 65302 P3026 $ 50,000 Fiscal Procedures Approved: I \141144c1 fistlli c I Date: t 10/15/2008 Agenda Item 7D • 10 • RIVERS/DE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION COMM/SS/ON DATE: November 12, 2008 TO: Riverside County Transportation Commission FROM: Budget and Implementation Committee Shirley Medina, Programming and Planning Manager THROUGH: Anne Mayer, Executive Director SUBJECT: Transportation Uniform Mitigation Fee Regional Arterial Program Update BUDGET AND IMPLEMENTATION COMMITTEE AND STAFF RECOMMENDATION: This item is for the Commission to receive and file an update on the Transportation Uniform Mitigation Fee (TUMF) Regional Arterial program. BACKGROUND INFORMATION: In 2004, the Commission approved 24 projects for the Western County TUMF Regional Arterial program. The total amount of the requested funding was $185 million. To date, $73 million has been programmed. A summary of the TUMF programming is as follows: Project Phase Amount (in millions) PA&ED (Preliminary Engineering) $ 9.809 PS&E (Design) $12.355 Right -of -Way $30.769 Construction $ 20.736 Total $73.669 Project sponsors are required to enter into formal agreements with the Commission for each individual project outlining the work to be performed by phase and funding amount. To date, 22 agreements have been executed. Two project agreements are scheduled to be initiated in FY 2008/09. Attachment 1 illustrates the status of the project agreements. Construction of TUMF regional arterial projects is progressing. Two projects have completed construction, which are the Ramona Expressway project in the city of San Jacinto, and the Van Buren Boulevard widening project from Andrew Street to Garfield Avenue, in the city of Riverside. City of Corona's El Cerrito Avenue Agenda Item 7E 11 project is under construction and scheduled to be complete soon. The construction schedule for all of the TUMF regional arterial projects is included in Attachment 2. TUMF expenditures for. FY 2007/08 were $9.6 million and FY 2008/09 expenditures to date are $181,000. Commission staff is actively monitoring the status of each project and will continue to report on the progress of the TUMF Regional Arterial program on a quarterly basis. Attachments: 1) Commission TUMF Regional Arterial Funds Programmed 2) TUMF Regional Arterials Construction Schedule Agenda Item 7E • 12 • 5B 6 7 8 • Riverside County Transportation Commission TUMF Regional Arterial Funds Programmed ATTACHMENT 1 • • • • .. - • r erre Project Phases: 4 lgnararae(;a+va,T eaaaporlaUr (pwr4rFar Arterial Project Details Project chedule and Funding: Programmed ( 51 In millions) Note: Amounts In Grey have been requested but gal programmed - Date Programme d by RCTC Lead Agency Project Tile Project Limits Phase FY 2005 FY 2006 FY 2007 FY 2008 FY 2009 Phase Total AGREEMENT STATUS I 9/14/2006 Corona Green River Road project Dominguez Ranch Road to SR 91 PA&ED -S 0.200" c - r. Est: SIGNED 1 Signed PS&E $ 0.600 l_- ..Amendment _ $ - b - I; Dr J $. 4.242 R/W Cons 1'aarTOlaI PA&ED $ - $ 3.442 $ 4242 ! 9/8/2004 Corona Foothill Parkway Westerly Extension Pasco Grande to Lincoln Avenue $ 2.000 j. - ®®� o00 1 _ :;00 $� - - $L?3. $ 21.282 SIGNED PS&E R/W. $ 12.000 Cons Ycarlofcil $ - _ 14.OJ0 I 9/14/2006 Corona 1-15Cerrito Rd/ Interchange Capacity Improvements Bedford Canyon Road to the 1-15 Northbound Ramps P $ 1.000 ! $ i 00.. g I.001, $ �- $0_000.$.. _1400 SIGNED PS&E R/W Cons _ Year total PAGED $ - $, - 9/8/2004 Lake Elsinore Railroad Canyon Road/ 1-15 Interchange Improvements,, Interstate 15 to Canyon Hills Road $ 0.300 -- _ 0.30 0 a 5 CO,, ::1 ;nn �$� lOJ - y 000$ .13.500 PS&E R/W Cons PA&ED 9/8/2004 Moreno Valley Penis Boulevard Widening Cactus Avenue to PVSD Lateral"B" $ 0.303 0 iO3 $ 0.677 't 0 1, r7 1. $ 1 SI 1 _.� _•_i $ 0.577 $ 1_571 $5 99/ $ 8A98 SIGNED Amendment 1 Signed PS&E R/W Cons Year Total PA&ED $ - $ 0.303 II/14/2007 Perris Penis Boulevard Widening Ramona Expressway to PVSD Lateral "B" S 0.086 b 36 IN PROCESS PS&E $ 0.194 _ .j ' $ 0.194 $ Q4i4 $1 /L $.:- R/W -Cons 1 lotal .1 - .. _ �.086 9/8/2004 Moreno Valley Parris Boulevard Widening Ironwood Avenue to Monzanito Avenue PA&ED $ 0.134 _.2.427 a 0131 SIGNED _PS&E $ 0.336 ®- $ _ C 336 $ I 025 1.31 T $ 1.3G1 $ - 1,1.31 j c. 2.837 $, 0.40v R/W Cons YecrToial $ - $ 0.T34 12/8/2004 Riverside County Transportation Deportment Reche Cynl Reche Vista Heacock St to SB Co. e PA&ED $ '0A09 SIGNED PS&E $ _ .. _._. - ° - $ - b $O.O3G: $ :'0.409 R/W Cons- va erTolal PALLED $ 0.41, $ - 11l9/2005 Riverside Van Buren Widening Andrew to Garfield - - g _ SIGNED- --- $ Amendment i Signed >_I $ - _ .,_ _ $$ 2.329 $- $ - 0.000 $ 2.329 PS&E R/W- Cons YearTolaI - $ - $ 2.329 $ 2.329 Page 1 of 3 13 9 10 11 1 1 1 1 1 1 Medal Project Details Project Schedule and Funding Programmed ( 31 In millions) Note: Amounts In Grey have been requested but.mai programmed AGREEMENT STATUS Date Programme d by ROTC lead Agency Project Tltle Project Umlh Phase FY 2005 FY 2006 FY 2007 FY 2008 FY 2009 Phase Total 4/12/2006 Riverside Van Buren Widening Santa Ano River to Jackson St KM:.---®- PS&E RCN Cons eanaroi _---- -- -®' $ ----- $ 0-645 Y' - SIGNED ? - I $ - $ $ ouc $ 0.805 '; - 9/8/2004 Riverside Van Buren BHd - 91 Freeway Interchange Van Buren Blvd at the 91 Freeway Interohnage SIGNED Amendment 1 Signed PS&E-- R/SN lenr1$t$1 OLVIE.iEgiNBININEMEM-ONEMMinn - $ - ----- $ o_n2 1.000 $ 2.000 $ 20o0 : - $ 6.000 r' : '1 107J $ - $ OUO i_6_; $ 10.000 $ 0. 71: $ - $ $ $ : D I $ 0.712 -nilliM® S 1I,,Cv > I Dot, E - _. , $ 4.000 ` K 13 i1On $ - $ 4.$$$ _ ($4. $ : 15.000 t, - 9/8/2004 Riverside County Transportation Deportment Bundy Canyon Road/Scott Road improvement Improvement ject pro_, Bundy Canyon Road from 1-15 Murietta Road,Scott Road $ SIGNED SIGNED Amendment 1 Signed SIGNED PS&E R/W Cons r= o; Tot$ 7/11/2004' Riverside County Department State Route 79 Improvement Project Widen State Route 79 to fo (4) lanes from Thompson to Doemenigonl On van Buren Blvd from Clay Street (north limits) PS&E R KM Cons Year Total �---�5 $ 1.000 $ 2.000 ---- $ - 9/8/2004 Riverside County Transportation Department Van Buren Boulevard Widening and Bridge PSSE Mt Cons @ E� $ 5.220 5 220 $ _ $ - $ - ;7 C0 $ 5.220 ��� $ D2r 9/8/2004 Riverside County Transportation Department Van Buren Boulevard Widening On Van Buren Blvd behveen Washington Street and WoodRd SIGNED Amendment 1 Signed PS&E RAN Coro YeorT$ IMMEN -- -- 5 T.275 1.000E $ - 1.000E $ 0.688 _ .: - '].ri3 - Ilr $ 0.963' 1.000.I®UMINNII ?.: Dui; 9/8/2004 Riverside County Transportation Department Eastern Bypass Project Development Potrero Boulevard Development Eastern Bypass from to FI5 Auld Road Potrero Blvd- from San Timoteo Canyon Road/ Oak Glen Rd SIGNED PS&E ®= _sToal •® IDL�2 $ iCUJ --- _ $ t.' - KJu;G $ 3.000 ��® _ _ - $ 5 - $t0 $ =2.000 ®-- $ 01"[i I 9/8/2004 Riverside County Transportation Department IN PROCESS PS&E RPM Cons YmrTclal PA&ED - O $ - - $ 2.000 ... $ Z.oCO $ 0.750 ' 9/8/2004 Riverside Counly Transportation Department New Interchange on 1-15 at Schleisman Road - 15 between the existing Limonite Ave IC and Sixth St IC - ._,. .- SIGNED PS&E R/W Cons TotalYear EMEI----_ $ - , 1);',I, ® $ 2.000 j ;1 , 1 b 4250 ,i ? l0.000 -- - - i, - :' 1c) f.-?oJ $ 27.000 » Riverside County Transportation Department CNnio Keith Rd/ I-151C Improvement Project Clinton Keith/it 15 Interchange - PS&E R(yJ• - Cons `!c-or 1$1411 ® ® 4 - $ - _ .: 5 3 t n0 ... .13.S:r[i $ 13.500 Papa 2 of 3 410 • • 1 2 21 22 23 24 Arterial Project Details Project chedute and Funding Programmed ( $ s n millions) Note: Amounts In Grey have been requested but not programmed AGREEMENT STATUS Date Programme d by RCTC lead Agency Project Vile Project Limits Phase FY 2005 FY 2006 FY 2007 FY 2008 FY 2009 Phase Total Riverside PA&ED $ 0.600 $ 0.750 3- 0.750 $ J.o'J0 SIGNED County New IC at the Eastern PS&E $ _ 1 9/8/2004 Transportation Department EasternBypass/ 1-15 Bypass/4I5 w .. :.. ..... _.: _.._.,.__ - Cons Year Total $ oson $ o.730 $ 0.7.'>:1 $ - $O.000 $ 2.000 Sanderson PA&ED $ 0.040 $ (" )<0 SIGNED Ramona Avenue (Hwy PS&E $ 0.160 �- $ 9.1.0 Amendment Signed 9/8/2204 San Jacinto Expressway 79) to westerly $ - Amendment2 Signed Widening city limits $ 3.900 _ $ 39a0 Year10101 $ 0040 $ 4OW > - - $0.000 $ 4.100 _ PA&ED $ 0.200 % n _( 0 SIGNED 9/8/2004 San Jacinto on Ratmoirw of Expressway Seventh Street to Cedar PS&E $ 0.300 _ ; p ;ie R/W $ 0.900 -, $ 0.`h)0 (Gap Closure) Avenue Cont _ $ 4500 YearTotal $ 0,500 $ 0.900 $ 4S i $ - 40.000 $ 5.900 Westem Bypass Corridor Approximately from I-15/SR 79 PAGED $ 0.700 -- $ 0.700 SIGNED PS8E R/W 9/8/2004 Temecula Alignment South - Study Interchange Cons -- . , - -_-- Year iotnl $ - $ 0.704) $ - $ - $0.000 $ 0.700 French Valley 0.98 km north of P S 2.000 SIGNED S&E 9/8/2004 Temecula Pkwy/1-15 Winchester Rd h : r'lia. R/W S 5.517 Overcrossing and IC (SR79) IC and 2.43 km s/o the g 5 517 _ �i g )(-1 nip - Cons Year Tolal $ - $ 7_517 $ - $ - $30.007 $ 27.517 PALED SIGNED I-15/SR79 South Intersection of I- S&E 5 0.100 $ 0. a 9/8/2004 Temecula Ultimate !Sand SR79 R/W 5 4.352 $ 4_253 Interchange South Cons _ --_. _u $ 5.900 Year Total $ 4 452 $ 0_I00 $ 5.900 $ - $ 1000 $ 10.352 PROJECT AGREEMENTS SIGNED TOTAL TUMF REGIONAL FUNDS PROGRAMMED pbb 10/14/08 PA&ED $ 4.136 $ 3.923 $ 1.750 $ - $ - PS&E R/W Cons $ 1.300 $ 4.352 6.860 $ 20.417 15.736 $ 2.195 $ - $ 1.000 $ 2.000 $ 6.000 $ 4.000 $ - $ - $ _ Year Total $ 9.788 $ 45.936 $ 4.945 $ 12.500 $0.000 Page 3 of 3 15 9.509 10.0 5.5 0.7G9 :0.73G 9.809 12.355 20.769 20.736 $ 73.669 ( • ATTACHMENT 2 • TUMF REGIONAL ARTERIALS CONSTRUCTION SCHEDULE A. enc San Jacinto Riverside Project Ramona Expressway Limits b,,i I`:' Sanderson to Wy City Limits Project Number 5117 5122 CONSTRUCTION START FISCAL YR. 2007 CONSTRUCTION COMPLETE* 7/07 Van Buren Blvd Andrew to Garfield 2007 2108 Corona County of Riverside El Cerrito Van Buren Blvd Bedford n Rd to 1-15 N.B. Washington to Wood 5101 2007 5116 2009 8/08 Riverside Van Buren Blvd Santa Ana River to Jackson 5126 2009 San Jacinto Ramona Ex • resswa Seventh to Cedar 5118 2009 Moreno Valley Perris Blvd Ironwood to Manzanita 5105 2010 Corona Green River Road Dominguez Ranch Rd to SR 91 5103 2010 Corona Foothill Parkway Lincoln to Green River 6102 2010 Riverside Van Buren Blvd I.C. @SR 91 5108 2010 County of Riverside Bundy Cyn/ Scott Rd 1-15 to 1-1215 5109 2010 County of Riverside SR 79 Thompson to Domenigoni 5114 2010 County of Riverside Van Buren Blvd Clay to 1200' S. of Santa Ana River 5115 2010 Coun of Riverside Potrero Blvd San Timoteo n Rd to Sr 79 5112 2010 Temecula French Valley Pkwy I.0 @ I-15 5119 2011 Moreno Valle Perris Blvd Ramona Exresswa to Cactus 5106 2011 County of Riverside Schlelsman Rd LC @ 1-15 5113 2012 Lake Elsinore Railroad C n Rd (Auld I.0 .1 1-15 5104 2012 County of RiversideEastern Bypass Rd to 1-15 6110� TBD* County of Riverside Eastem Bypass I.C. @ I-15 5111 TBD* Temecula Western Bypass Align. 1-15 to SR 79 South I.C. 5121 TBD* County of Riverside Reche Cyn/Reche Vista Heacock to S.B Co Line 5107 TBD* * TBD - Date cannot be determined until significant environmental impacts have been addressed. ** Completion dates are shown for projects currently under construction. pb 10/14108 16 • • • RIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION DATE: November 12, 2008 TO: Riverside County Transportation Commission FROM: Budget and Implementation Committee Min Saysay, Right -of -Way Manager THROUGH: Anne Mayer, Executive Director SUBJECT: Resolution Electing to Hear Resolution of Necessity Interstate 215/State Route 60 East Junction Project for the BUDGET AND IMPLEMENTATION COMMITTEE AND STAFF RECOMMENDATION: This item is for the Commission to adopt Resolution No. 08-026, "Resolution of the Riverside County Transportation Commission Electing to Hear Future Resolutions of Necessity for the High Occupancy Vehicle Lane Project for the 1-215/SR-60 East Junction and Designation of Commission General Counsel to Process Resolution of Necessity Packages for the Project". BACKGROUND INFORMATION: Commission and Caltrans District 8, Right -of -Way Department decided to partner on acquiring the right-of-way required for construction of the High Occupancy Vehicle Lane project for the I-215/SR-60 East Junction project. It was further agreed that one of the Commission's responsibilities in the right-of-way acquisition process is to hear future resolutions of necessity (RONs) and designate Commission's general counsel to process and approve the resolution package(s). By adopting Resolution No. 08-026, the Commission agrees to follow all procedures for the RON process as outlined in the Caltrans Right -of -Way Manual, which requires first and second level reviews prior to seeking RONs. Caltrans' policies and procedures also require a four -fifths vote to pass a RON. Attachment: Resolution No. 08-026 Agenda Item 7F 17 • RESOLUTION NO.08-026 RESOLUTION OF THE RIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION ELECTING TO HEAR FUTURE RESOLUTIONS OF NECESSITY FOR THE HIGH OCCUPANCY VEHICLE LANE PROJECT FOR THE I-215/SR-60 EAST JUNCTION AND DESIGNATION OF COMMISSION GENERAL COUNSEL TO PROCESS RESOLUTION OF NECESSITY PACKAGES FOR THE PROJECT WHEREAS, the Riverside County Transportation Commission ("RCTC") is empowered to acquire by eminent domain any property to carry out its powers or functions pursuant to Public Utilities Code section 130220.5; WHEREAS, property may properly be acquired by eminent domain for the State Highway System pursuant to Streets and Highways Code section 102; WHEREAS, RCTC has approved the construction of high occupancy vehicle ("HOV") lane connectors from southbound I-215 to eastbound SR-60 and from westbound SR-60 to I-215 at the junction in and near the City of Moreno Valley, a project on the State of California Highway System, and has concurrently with this resolution approved a cooperative agreement with the State of California Department of Transportation (Caltrans) providing that RCTC will perform right of way activities as set forth in the cooperative agreement for said project; WHEREAS, all local public agency projects on the State of California Highway System, within the existing or proposed State of California rights of way are subject to the requirements of the State of California Department of Transportation (Caltrans) Right of Way Manual, and recent provisions to the Caltrans Right of Way Manual now require a local public agency to pass a resolution, by a four -fifths vote, making an election to hear all the Resolutions of Necessity for the project; and WHEREAS, RCTC will follow state statute requirements and the Caltrans Right of Way Manual processes in the issuance of the Notice of Intent to adopt a Resolution of Necessity and in the adoption of a Resolution of Necessity, and the RCTC General Counsel is designated to process and approve the resolution packages(s); NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the Riverside County Transportation Commission, by a four -fifths vote, will hear the Resolutions of Necessity associated with the construction of High Occupancy Vehicle lane connectors from southbound I-215 to eastbound SR-60 and from westbound SR-60 to 1-215 at the junction in and near the City of Moreno Valley. BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that RCTC designates its General Counsel to prepare, review, process, and approve the Resolutions of Necessity packages for this project. RVPUMZKATOR1754007.1 1 18 PASSED AND ADOPTED this day of , 2008. By: Chair Riverside County Transportation Commission A I"1'hST: By: Clerk of the Board RVPUTAZKATOR1754007.1 2 19 • • • RIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION DATE: November 12, 2008 TO: Riverside County Transportation Commission FROM: Budget and Implementation Committee Min Saysay, Right -of -Way Manager THROUGH: Anne Mayer, Executive Director SUBJECT: Resolution Electing to Hear Resolution of Necessity for the State Route 74/G Street to Interstate 215 Interchange Project BUDGET AND IMPLEMENTATION COMMITTEE AND STAFF RECOMMENDATION: This item is for the Commission to adopt Resolution No. 08-027, "Resolution of the Riverside County Transportation Commission Electing to Hear Future Resolutions of Necessity for the SR-74/I-215 Project and Designation of Commission General Counsel to Process Resolution of Necessity Packages for the Project". BACKGROUND INFORMATION: Commission and Caltrans District 8, Right -of -Way Department decided to partner on acquiring the right-of-way required for construction of the SR-74/G Street to Interstate 215 Interchange. It was further agreed that one of the Commission's responsibilities in the right-of-way acquisition process is to hear future resolutions of necessity (RONs) and designate Commission's general counsel to process and approve the resolution package(s). By adopting Resolution No. 08-027, the Commission agrees to follow all procedures for the RON process as outlined in the Caltrans Right -of -Way Manual, which requires first and second level reviews prior to seeking RONs. Caltrans' policies and procedures also require a four -fifths vote to pass a RON. Attachment: Resolution No. 08-027 Agenda Item 7G 20 • RESOLUTION NO.08=027 RESOLUTION OF THE RIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION ELECTING TO HEAR FUTURE RESOLUTIONS OF NECESSITY FOR THE SR-744-215 PROJECT AND DESIGNATION OF COMMISSION GENERAL COUNSEL TO PROCESS RESOLUTION OF NECESSITY PACKAGES FOR THE PROJECT WHEREAS, the Riverside County Transportation Commission ("RCTC") is empowered to acquire by eminent domain any property to carry out its powers or functions pursuant to Public Utilities Code section 130220.5; WHEREAS, property may properly be acquired by eminent domain for the State Highway System pursuant to Streets and Highways Code section 102; WHEREAS, RCTC has approved interchange improvements, ramp improvements, intersection reconfigurations, bridge replacement and widening of SR-74 between G Street and the interchange with the I-215 and Redlands Avenue between the interchange with the I-215 and San Jacinto Avenue in the City of Perris, a project on the State of California Highway System, and has concurrently with this resolution approved a cooperative agreement with the State of California Department of Transportation (Caltrans) providing that RCTC will perform right of way activities as set forth in the cooperative agreement for said project; WHEREAS, all local public agency projects on the State of California Highway System, within the existing or proposed State of California rights of way are subject to the requirements of the State of California Department of Transportation (Caltrans) Right of Way Manual, and recent provisions to the Caltrans Right of Way Manual now require a local public agency to pass a resolution, by a four -fifths vote, making an election to hear all the Resolutions of Necessity for the project; and WHEREAS, RCTC will follow state statute requirements and the Caltrans Right of Way Manual processes in the issuance of the Notice of Intent to adopt a Resolution of Necessity and in the adoption of a Resolution of Necessity, and the RCTC General Counsel is designated to process and approve the resolution packages(s); NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the Riverside County Transportation Commission, by a four -fifths vote, will hear the Resolutions of Necessity associated with the construction of interchange improvements, ramp improvements, intersection reconfigurations, bridge replacement and widening of SR-74 between G Street and the interchange with the I-215 and Redlands Avenue between the interchange with the I-215 and San Jacinto Avenue in the City of Perris. BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that RCTC designates its General Counsel to prepare, review, process, and approve the Resolutions of Necessity packages for this project. RVPUBVICATOR1754010.1 1 21 PASSED AND ADOPTED this day of , 2008. By: Chair Riverside County Transportation Commission Al lEST: By: Clerk of the Board RVPUMZKATOR1754010.1 2 22 • RIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION DATE: November 12, 2008 TO: Riverside County Transportation Commission FROM: Budget and Implementation Committee Edda Rosso, Capital Projects Manager Erik Galloway, Bechtel Project Coordinator Richard Bryan, Bechtel Rail Projects Manager THROUGH: Anne Mayer, Executive Director SUBJECT: Agreement for the Construction of . Phase Transportation Facility in the City of Perris I - Perris Multimodal BUDGET AND IMPLEMENTATION COMMITTEE AND STAFF RECOMMENDATION: This item is for the Commission to: 1) Award Agreement No. 09-33-046-00 to L A Engineering, Inc. for the construction of Phase I - Perris Multimodal Transportation Facility adjacent to C Street, between State Route 74 and San Jacinto Avenue in the city of Perris (Perris) in the amount of $4,904,841 plus a contingency amount of $495,159 for a total contract authorization of $5.4 million; 2) Authorize the Chair, pursuant to legal counsel review, to execute the agreement on behalf of the Commission; 3) Authorize the Executive Director or designee to approve work as may be required for the project; and 4) Authorize the Executive Director or designee pursuant to legal counsel review, to execute utility relocation and undergrounding agreements with Southern California Edison (SCE) and Verizon for a total not to exceed amount of $190,000 and $175,000 respectively. BACKGROUND INFORMATION: At its September 12, 2007 meeting, the Commission authorized staff to advertise to receive construction bids for the construction of Phase I - Perris Multimodal Transportation Facility adjacent to C Street, between SR-74 and San Jacinto Avenue in Perris. Because the multimodal facility will serve as a future Metrolink Perris Valley Line commuter rail station, the Commission is the project lead for development, design, and construction of the multimodal facility in coordination with Riverside Transit Agency (RTA). The Phase I work will include construction of a multimodal facility with a 141-space park and ride lot, a bus plaza with eight loading bays, closed circuit television system, and a transit platform for future Agenda Item 7H 23 Metrolink access. Along with the main facility improvements, there will be street improvements along C Street, and at the intersection of C Street and SR-74, Rule 20 utilities undergrounding and landscaping. The Commission retained Owen Group, Inc. to provide construction management services for the North Main Corona parking structure project and the multimodal facility. Owen Group, Inc. has reviewed and provided comments on the design drawings and construction bid package for the multimodal facility. At its July 9, 2003 meeting, the Commission approved the selection process and awarded Agreement No. 04-33-007 to Psomas, formerly known as Pountney Consulting Group, Inc., for the development of the master plan, environmental clearance, and final design of the Phase I. The final design of the project commenced in March 2007, after receiving environmental clearance and completion of the master plan. Phase I is a key component of the downtown Perris revitalization efforts and staff has been working closely with Perris planning and engineering departments during the final design of the Phase I. Perris has reviewed and approved the final design and is ready to issue the necessary permits for construction. The funding for the project required California Transportation Commission action and the subsequent obligation and transfer of the RTA funds by Caltrans, which resulted in a delay in the advertisement for construction of the project. The project was advertised on October 1, 2008, with the bid opening scheduled for October 30, 2008 at 2:00 p.m. On October 28, 2008, Addendum No. 1 was issued to incorporate changes to the bid documents resulting from bidders' questions, staff and construction management team review, and engineering design changes. In addition to the bid document changes, the bid opening date was postponed until November 3, 2008 at 2:00 p.m. to provide the bidders additional time to review Addendum No. 1. Nine bids were received and opened on November 3, 2008, at 2:00 p.m. A summary of the bids received is shown in Table A: TABLE A Perris Multimodal Transportation Facility Bid Summary c Firm (In order from Low bid to High bid) Bid Amountcr Amount Over Low Bid Engineer's Estimate $5,000,000 N/A 1 L A Engineering, Inc. $ 4,904,840.85 Lowest Responsive Bidder Agenda Item 7H • 24 • 2 Riverside Construction $ 4,988,192.00 $ 83,351.15 3 Landmark Site $ 5,208,092.00 $ 303,251.15 4 Harbor Construction $ 5,362,000.00 $ 457,159.15 5 TC Construction $ 5,536,999.00 $ 632,158.15 6 4-Con Construction $ 5,665,662.00 $ 760,821.15 7 Milcon Construction $ 5,697,530.20 $ 792,689.35 8 Adams Mallory $ 5,999,917.00 $ 1,095,076.15 9 AMG Construction $ 7,641,442.00 $ 2,736,601.15 The bids were reviewed by staff and by legal counsel. The bid by L A Engineering, Inc. was the lowest responsive and responsible bid received for the project. A summary of the review of the bid responses for the top three bidders is detailed in Table B: TABLE B Perris Multimodal Transportation Facility Bid Checklist Checklist Item L A Engineering Riverside Construction Landmark Site 1 Bid Letter Acceptable minor irregularity Yes Yes 2 Bid Comparison - w/Eng's Est Yes Yes Yes - w/other Bidders Yes Yes Yes 3 Bid Bond Included Yes Yes Yes 4 List of Subcontractors Yes Yes Yes Prime Performs > 35% Work Yes Yes Yes 5 Bidder Information Forms Yes Yes Yes - Reference Check Yes Yes Yes 6 Non -Collusion Affidavit Yes Yes Yes 7 Evidence of Insurance Yes Yes Yes 8 Was Bidder Responsive? Yes Yes Yes Agenda Item 7H 25 Table C below summarizes the subcontractors listed by L A Engineering, Inc. TABLE c Perris Multimodal Transportation Facility L A Engineering's listed Subcontractors Name Address Telephone License No. Type of Work Subcontract Amount Union Construction PO Box 2395, Irwindale, CA 91706 626-388- 7923 863018 Structural Concrete $ 30,000 Alpha &Omega Pavers 13621 Stacy Lynn Dr. Moreno Valley CA 92555 951-924 8344 798734 Pavers $ 181,650 Amber Steel 312 Willow Ave. Rialto, CA 92377 909-874- 2213 268566 Reinforcing Steel g 105,407 Acetek Roofing 5830 Wood Lawn Ave. Los Angeles, CA 90003 323 231- 6060 874330 Canopy roofing $ 67,980 California Boring 770 N. Eckhoff Orange, CA 92868 714-456- 9650 689006 Boring & Pipe Jacking $ 32,040 Alcorn Fence PO Box 3279 Riverside CA 92515 951-685- 5871 122954 Fencing $114,761.50 CMB 8956 Cottage Ave Unit A Rancho Cucamonga, CA 91730 909-980- 4538 613977 Storm Drain Structures $ 75,800 Wideflange Steel 720 Indigo Court Pomona CA 91767 909-624- 5959 869520 Structural Steel Canopies $ 370,000 Mahaffey 1800 S Alameda St Compton CA 90221 31 0208 520180 Drilling $18,000 Highlight Electric PO Box 7339 Riverside, CA 92513 951-352- 9646 806335 Electrical $1,248,500 Based on staff's review of the bids received, and legal counsel approval, staff is recommending that the Commission award Agreement No. 09-33-046-00 for the construction of the Perris Multimodal Transportation Facility to L A Engineering, Inc. in the amount of $4,904,841 plus a contingency amount of $495,159 for a total contract authorization of $5.4 million. The standard Commission construction contract will be used, pursuant to legal counsel review. Agenda Item 7H 26 • As part of the project, the overhead utilities within the project limits will be removed and relocated underground. This work will be performed jointly by the successful bidder, SCE and Verizon. The work will require the Commission to enter into utility relocation and undergrounding agreements with SCE and Verizon. These agreements require the Commission to reimburse SCE and Verizon to perform the removal and undergrounding of its facilities. The agreements are currently being negotiated and will be executed, pursuant to legal counsel review, upon completion of the negotiations. The estimated not to exceed costs for these agreements are $190,000 for SCE and $175,000 for Verizon. Budget This project is jointly funded by RTA and the Commission. complete design and construction of Phase 1 is as follows: Federal Transit Administration (FTA) Section 5309 Passed-Thru From RTA FTA Transportation Enhancement (TE) Passed-Thru From RTA Transportation/Traffic Uniform Mitigation Fee (TUMF) Passed-Thru From RTA Commuter Assistance Measure A Rail Proposition 1 B Rail Measure A Funding for the $2,317,133 $1,352,472 $1,050,000 $1,000,000 $1,000,000 $579,250 Total Budget: $7,298,855 This total budget amount includes the overall design costs, construction costs, utility relocation, street improvements, project oversight, permits, etc. The project budget will also be adjusted by this agenda item to address the additional costs for utility relocation and the construction contingency. The current budget allocated for construction is $5 million and should be adjusted to $5.4 million, requiring a budget adjustment of $400,000. The current budget allocated for permits is $100,000 and this needs to be adjusted to incorporate the utility undergrounding work for SCE and Verizon for a new total of $365,000, required a $265,000 will be added. The total adjustment required for the overall project is $665,000. Agenda Item 7H 27 Financial Information In Fiscal Year Budget: Yes No Year: FY 2008l09 FY 2008/09_. Amount: $5,100;000 $665,000 Federal FTA and TE Grant Funds, No Source of Funds: TUMF, and Measure A Funds Budget Adjustment: Yes GLA No.: 221 33 81301 P3816 $5,400,000 221 33 81020 P3816 $ 365,000 Fiscal Procedures Approved: \ d,41%p Date: 11 /04/2008 Agenda Item 7H 28 • RIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION DATE: November 12, 2008 TO: Riverside County Transportation Commission FROM: Plans and Programs Committee Sheldon Peterson, Rail Manager Mark Massman, Bechtel Project Manager Bill Biehl, Bechtel Project Coordinator THROUGH: Anne Mayer, Executive Director SUBJECT: Agreement with Cornerstone Studios to Provide On -Call Design and Engineering Services for the Commuter Rail Station Rehabilitation and Maintenance Plan PLANS AND PROGRAMS COMMITTEE AND STAFF RECOMMENDATION: This item is for the Commission to: 1) Award Agreement No. 09-33-009-00 to Cornerstone Studios to provide on -call design and engineering support services for the Commuter Rail Station Rehabilitation and Maintenance Plan (Plan), for "a not to exceed amount of $300,000; 2) Authorize the Chair, pursuant to legal counsel review, to execute the agreement on behalf of the Commission. BACKGROUND INFORMATION: At its April 2008, the Commission approved the Plan and directed staff to implement the recommendations needed to make improvements that increase energy efficiency and reduce water usage, while increasing the life of the assets at the five Riverside County commuter rail stations. To support the project, professional expertise is required to provide direction and guidance for these improvements. On August 14, 2008, the Commission released a request for qualifications (RFQ) to provide on -call design and engineering services in support of the Plan. The Plan requires that the consultant: 1. Evaluate the existing site conditions at the stations. 2. Develop alternative recommendations to improve landscaping, painting, and electrical elements with the overall goal to be energy efficient and conserve resources. Agenda Item 71 29 3. Coordinate with staff to review the recommendations and take direction from staff as to the best approach for moving forward. 4. Design the station improvements based on staff direction and provide bid ready design and scope specification documents. The evaluation and design process is anticipated to be completed within nine months. Once completed the designs and recommendations will be included in construction bid packages to be publically advertised and awarded. These contracts will be brought back to the Commission for approval. Selection Process The Calendar of events was as follows: Distribution of RFQ Bidders Information Meeting (not mandatory) Proposals were Delivered to the Commission prior to 2 p. Short Listed Firms were Notified Interviews of Short Listed Firms Selected Firm Notified August 14, 2008; August 21, 2008 September 4, 2008 September 10, 2008 September 11, 2008 September 18, 2008 An evaluation panel of representatives from the Commission and Bechtel was assembled to review the eight proposals that were received. The panel narrowed the list to two proposals based on quality, experience, and expertise of the bidders. Both firms demonstrated that they would be capable of completing the proposed scope of work and were interviewed. After careful evaluation of the personnel of the proposed project teams, knowledge of the project, and proposed project approach, the panel ranked Cornerstone Studios, Inc. as the most qualified firm followed by VA Consulting, Inc. This item was presented to the Plans and Programs Committee on October 27, 2008 and approved by the Committee. Staff recommends that the Commission award this contract to Cornerstone Studios to provide on -call design and engineering services in support of the Plan, based on the attached project scope. The amount of the contract is not to exceed $300,000. The funding to cover this project will come from Commuter Rail's Proposition 1 B Public Transportation Modernization, Improvement and Service Enhancement Account (PTMISEA). Agenda Item 71 30 • Financial Information In Fiscal Year Budget: Yes Year: FY 2008/09 Amount: $300,000 Source of Funds: Prop 1 B PTMISEA Budget Ad ustment: No GLA No.: 221 33 73304 P4011 $300,000 Fiscal Procedures Approved: \ac Date: 10/15/2008 Attachment: Scope of Services Agenda Item 71 31 STATION REHABILITIATION PLAN ON -CALL DESIGN AND ENGINEERING SCOPE OF SERVICES The scope of services includes: 1. Evaluation of existing landscaping at the five (5) Metrolink stations and propose recommendations, with several alternatives, to replace the existing landscaping with drought -resistant, low-water usage, low maintenance landscaping. Alternatives shall include varying degrees of water conservation, ranging between moderate to low water usage. This includes an irrigation system, such as a bubbler or drip system that will minimize the overspray onto the asphalt parking surfaces. 2. Evaluation of existing painted surfaces — railings, stairways, canopies, platform painting and striping, and pedestrian overcrossings — and propose recommendations for painting and coatings to reduce maintenance costs. 3. Evaluation of existing light fixtures and all other electrical equipment and systems and provide recommendations for appropriate electrical components and equipment to improve energy conservation capabilities, reduce operating costs and reduce maintenance costs. 4. Final PS&E for the landscaping and irrigation systems selected by RCTC. 5. Final PS&E for the painting and coatings selected by RCTC. 6. Final PS&E for the light fixtures and other electrical equipment, components and systems selected by RCTC. 7. Engineering support during the construction and implementation of the PS&E. 8. Optional — RCTC reserves the right to add to the scope. Work Activities The overall action plan will be to obtain PS&E for each of the activities identified above. All work will be performed to meet the latest state and federal standards as they are applicable to the element of work being performed. The RFQ shall discuss how Offeror will address the following components: Preliminary Activities 1. Preliminary engineering (conceptual designs) to support landscaping and irrigation alternatives; 2. Preliminary specifications to support painting and coatings alternatives; 32 3. Preliminary engineering (conceptual designs) to support light fixture and electrical systems alternatives; 4. Preliminary specifications to support electrical component and systems alternatives; and 5. Other miscellaneous studies that Offeror recommends performing in order to expedite project delivery. Activities for Development of PS&E For the PS&E development phase, the Offeror shall submit evidence, in the appendix section of the SOQ that the firm and its proposed subconsultant team members have the expertise, key personal and experience, to successfully complete all activities involved for the development, through completion, of the PS&E. This at a minimum should include the following primary activities: 1. Landscape architecture and irrigation systems; 2. Painting and coatings expertise; 3. Electrical engineering; 4. Utility coordination; 5. Processing all forms and documents for permits (if necessary); 6. Development of the plans, specifications and estimate (PS&E); and 7. Typical schedule of activities. Project Delivery RCTC has established the following milestones to be used in the development of a schedule for the work activities associated with meeting the requirements for the development of PS&E: 1. Consultant notice to proceed; 2. Preliminary evaluations and recommendations; 3. Begin PS&E; 4. Finalize PS&E; 5. Begin construction; and 6. End construction. 33 • General Requirements The selected consultant shall prepare all reports, • studies and plans to meet all requirements of all oversight agencies. RCTC staff will provide overall project coordination, and will handle administrative and policy matters. The county of riverside and affected cities will provide input on the proposed land use requirements and local circulation policies. Interim, draft and progress products The majority of the selected consultant's work in this phase will include data gathering, alternatives analyses and appropriate engineering reports. Specific draft or interim documents that may be required include the following: 1. Agendas, meeting minutes, progress reports and text materials to support meetings, as required; 2. Draft technical reports, for alternative selection; and, 3. Other products to match your work plan. Products - PS&E 1. Develop PS&E for 60% and 95% reviews; 2. Project management; 3. QA/QC plan; 4. Quantities and estimates; and 5. Finalize PS&E. Provide bid and construction support services 34 • • RIVERS/DE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION DATE: November 8, 2008 TO: Riverside County Transportation Commission FROM: Plans and Programs Committee Sheldon Peterson, Rail Manager THROUGH: Anne Mayer, Executive Director SUBJECT: North Main Corona Satellite Parking Agreement PLANS AND PROGRAMS COMMITTEE AND STAFF RECOMMENDATION: This item is for the Commission to approve Agreement No. 09-33-47-00 with Princeland Properties International, Inc. (Princeland) to provide for over 200 leased parking spaces as a satellite parking lot during the remaining construction of the North Main Corona parking structure construction for a not to exceed amount of $48,000. BACKGROUND INFORMATION: The Rail Program is requesting to enter into a new agreement for satellite parking for the North Main Corona Metrolink riders during construction of the parking structure. In October 2007, the Commission approved an agreement with Corona Community LLC, to allow for parking at its closed Edwards Theater property. The satellite parking program has worked extremely well since construction began in January of 2008 with a daily average of 200 cars parked at the overflow lot. The property owner has indicated to the Commission that its development plans are moving forward and it plans to demolish the old theater building and terminate the Commission's lease in January of 2009. The parking structure lot will still be under construction and is not scheduled to be complete until at least September 2009. Therefore, Commission staff entered negotiations with Princeland to use parking spaces at an office parking facility that is not currently being used on the corner of Joy Street and Princeland Avenue. The site can accommodate the demand with over 200 available spaces. The lease payments would be $4,000 a month for up to 12 months in case the parking structure construction is somehow delayed. The lease can be terminated with 30 days notice once the parking structure is ready to open. The new satellite parking lot is available to be used as soon as the agreement is executed. Agenda Item 7J 35 Even though the new satellite parking lot is within walking distance, the current shuttle program with Riverside Transit Agency and the city of Corona will continue at the new location for customer convenience. An extensive outreach program will be implemented to let the riders know of the change well in advance of the satellite parking lot switch. Staff is requesting that this agreement be approved in order to continue to serve the Metrolink riders who have been patient during the construction of the North Main Corona parking structure. There are sufficient funds in the budget from the existing parking lot lease to cover the entire 12 months of expenses of up to $48,000 for this project: Financial Information In Fiscal Year Budget: Yes N/A Year: FY 2008/09 FY 2009/10 Amount: $24,000 $24,000 Source of Funds: Local Transportation Fund Budget Ad ustment: No N/A GLA No.: 221 33 73001 3808 $48,000 Fiscal Procedures Approved: \14444,Lcittio, Date: 10/16/2008 Agenda Item 7J • • 36 • RIVERS/DE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION DATE: November 12, 2008 TO: Riverside County Transportation Commission FROM: Plans and Programs Committee Henry Nickel, Staff Analyst Sheldon Peterson, Rail Manager THROUGH: Anne Mayer, Executive Director SUBJECT: Commuter Rail Program Update PLANS AND PROGRAMS AND STAFF RECOMMENDATION: This item is for the Commission to receive and file an update on the Commuter Rail Program. BACKGROUND INFORMATION: Inland Empire -Orange County Weekend Service Performance Q1/Q2 FY 08/09 IEOC Weekend Passenger Trips 5000 — 4000 — 3000 — 2000 — 1000 — 0 Kim Last Year —6.—Current Year (15 p0 113 f13 AAtic yc�tiey��f 4 c� w c q) AQAAp_Aoo •\JP��4PAJv0 Q 9 9 �0eDp'� f N 6' ciy ^\' Daily passenger trips on the year-round Inland Empire -Orange County (IEOC) Metrolink weekend service have continued to grow into the first quarter, providing 28,724 passenger trips quarter to date. This is an inbrease of over 31.07% over the 21,915 trips ,provided at this point last year, attributed to increased gasoline prices and continued promotion. The success of this service is due in large part to the coordinated marketing efforts among the Commission, Orange County Transportation Authority, and San Bernardino Associated Governments. Most all responsibilities for marketing of the service have transitioned to Metrolink, this has included revised seat drops, branding, and consolidation of the various weekend services under a single promotional umbrella. Agenda Item 7K 37 Toy Train to Visit Riverside County November 29 and 30 This year's Metrolink Holiday Toy Express will visit Riverside County November 29 and 30. The Commission staff will be organizing events at each station and accommodating the Southern California Firefighters' Spark of Love Toy Drive. The Commission will sponsor events including food and entertainment at each Riverside County station. Commissioners are welcome to attend and participate in the events. Metrolink's Holiday Toy Express has been delighting audiences for more than ten years — providing a free, enjoyable, community -based holiday experience for the people who live and work in the areas served by Metrolink. This year will be no different as the Holiday Toy Express travels to 50 cities throughout the Southland. The Holiday Toy Express is a 450-ton Metrolink train decorated with giant glittering ornaments, animated displays, and more than 50,000 twinkling lights. 2008 HOLIDAY TRAIN SCHEDULE Saturday, November 29 North Main Corona 5:00 p.m. 5:45 p.m,. Riverside Downtown 6:45 p.m. - 7:15 p.m. La Sierra 7:45 p.m. - 8:15 p.m., Sunday, November 30 Pedley 5:00 p.m.- 530 p.m. The train travels to Metrolink station cities throughout southern California presenting a free live musical stage show at each stop; after the show kids of all ages have the opportunity to meet Santa and his friends after the show. The Holiday Toy Express supports the southern California Firefighters' Spark of Love Toy Drive — which collects and distributes toys to needy children encouraging audience members to share their holiday spirit by donating a new unwrapped toy at the show. Thanksgiving Day Service Metrolink will once again provide Thanksgiving Day and Thanksgiving Friday service. One way and round trip fares will be discounted 25% for travel completed on November 27. Metrolink will operate on an abbreviated schedule as follows: IEOC Line San Bernardino Line 2007 THANKSGIVING DAY SERVICE Special 4 round trip schedule From Riverside Downtown From Laguna Niguel/Mission Viejo M871 M873 M876 M877 M870 M872 M874 M876 8:30 10:00 16:30 18:15 10:10 11:40 18:15 20:00 Regular Sunday schedule Antelope Valley Line Regular Sunday schedule All Lines Agenda Item 7K Regular weekday schedule 38 • Metrolink Establishes Safety Review Panel and Implements Second Engineer Program At its regularly scheduled meeting on September 27, the Metrolink Board of Directors unanimously approved a sweeping set of multi -point motions to move forward on several fronts. Included is the requirement that trains carry an extra engineer in the control cab as a second set of eyes on single track territory. Additionally, the Board Chair now has authorization to create an independent rail safety peer review panel, evaluation of advanced train control technologies, adjust train crew staffing, review the agency's contract with Connex Railroad LLCIVeolia Transportation, and evaluate and update the agency's emergency preparedness and response plans and protocols. The Metrolink Board held a special meeting on October 10 and received a progress report from staff with timelines, cost estimates and other recommendations regarding the safety and emergency preparedness motions. Early Voting Comes to Riverside County Metrolink Stations This fall is election season. The Commission has joined with the Riverside County Registrar of Voters to bring the polls to Riverside County voters. Riverside County's first mobile voter education, outreach, and early voting venue will visit the county's five Metrolinkstations beginning October 27, ahead of Election Day on November 4. Financed by a grant from the Morongo Band of Mission Indians, the Registration, Outreach, Voting, and Education Resource, or ROVER, is a 34-foot custom built self- contained vehicle is equipped with touch screen voting equipment, a full complement of voting materials, wheelchair lift, and air conditioning. ROVER allows the Registrar of Voters to bring the county's popular Early Voting program to areas of the county not presently served by its three mall locations. ROVER STATION SCHEDULE Date Time Polling Location October 27 3:00 p.m. to 8:00 p.m. La Sierra Station October 28 3:00 p.m. to 8:00 p.m. North Main Corona Station October 29 3:00 p.m. to 8:00 p.m. Riverside Downtown Station October 30 3:00 p.m. to 8:00 p.m. Pedley Station October 31 3:00 p.m. to 8:00 p.m. West Corona Station ROVER will be located in the parking lot of each applicable station. Campaigning or electioneering of any kind is prohibited within 100 feet of any polling area. Further information is available at www.voteinfo.net. Agenda Item 7K 39 Parking Structure Construction Proceeds as Anticipated at North Main Corona Construction of a new six -story parking structure at the North Main Corona Metrolink station is continuing as anticipated and is officially more than halfway completed. Opening of the structure is scheduled for the fall of 2009. On January 4, 2008, the affected portion of the parking lot was closed. To compensate for the decrease of 239 spaces, the Commission leased 300 spaces as an auxiliary parking lot at the former Edwards movie theater. Corona Cruiser initiated shuttle service on February 26. Riverside Transit Agency (RTA) began providing additional shuttle service on January 7, transporting morning and evening Metrolink commuters to and from the station and auxiliary lot. This shuttle designated by RTA as the Route 206 "Hopper" transported 3,068 North Main Corona Metrolink station patrons during the month of September. This equates to 146 passengers daily. Additionally, RTA augmented Route 3 to now serve as a shuttle for mid -day passengers. Rendering of the completed North Main Corona Parking Structure. Riverside Line 6,000 5,600 5,200 4,800 4,400 4,000 Passenger Trips Riverside Line Month cal .56,55 got. �JSr C2 Daily weekday passenger trips on Metrolink's Riverside Line for the month of September averaged 5,342, an increase of 5, no change from the month of August. Compared to one year prior, the line averaged an overall daily increase of 79 passenger trips. This is nearly 2% more than a year ago. Agenda Item 7K • • 40 • 100 ® 95 as 90 m 85 i 80 m a 75 70 On Time Performance (95% Goal) Riverside Line p$o� �Soo� o4i eg"e,p°�°gco O 4°4ee v.Qe co0- Month September on -time performance averaged 99% inbound (1 % more than August) and 98% outbound (1 % more than August). There were 4 delays greater than five minutes during the month of September. The following are primary causes: Signals/Track/MOW Dispatching Mechanical Operations Inland Empire -Orange County Line 6,000 5,600 o 7-5,200 F 0 4,800 u 4,400 4,000 Passenger Trips Inland Empire Orange County Line 01 �O1 �p1 jib pcb p$ O`b OO pcb Cot p`b O'b OO O° �o Oa lac far QQ� Month Daily weekday passenger trips on Metrolink's IEOC Line for the month of September averaged 5,154, a decrease of 39, 1 % less than the month of August. Compared to one year prior, the line averaged an overall daily increase of 409 passenger trips. This is nearly 9% more than a year ago. Agenda Item 7K 41 100 m 95 90 m 85 m • 80 O 75 70 On Time Performance (95% Goal) Inland Empire Orange County Line Month September on -time performance averaged 98% inbound (+4% from August) and 93% outbound (+2% from August). There were 17 delays greater than five minutes during the month of September. The following are primary causes: 91 Line Signals/Track/MOW Dispatching Mechanical Operations Passenger Trips 91 Line 2,800 2,600 E- 2,400 6 2,200 2,000 1,800 oA oA Al A o� o� ow Ae A4 A� oe o� co 0NS. OQ� �a �0� lac P� �`o- �J� �J P�� yes Month Daily weekday passenger trips on Metrolink's 91 Line for the month of September averaged 2,462, an increase of 59, 2% more than the month of August. Compared to one year prior, the line averaged an overall daily increase of 268 passenger trips. This is nearly 12% more than a year ago. Agenda Item 7K 42 • 100 a) 95 9 90 ID 80 a 75 70 On Time Performance (95% Goal) 91 Line --e Al A o0 0�' o� ob p�' oq3 �eq., p°� �o, O�� �a° �¢,� �a� QQ� �a� �Jo )� PJA cp _ Month September on -time performance averaged 96% inbound (+2% from August) and 92% outbound (-4% from August). There were 4 delays greater than five minutes during the month of September. The following are primary causes: Signals/Track/MOW Dispatching Mechanical Operations Connecting Transit Service Performance The Commission's role facilitating interconnectivity between Metrolink and connecting transit services is essential to ongoing system viability. Such services address the needs of transit dependent riders as well as help mitigate congestion and the necessity for expensive parking capacity at the Commission stations. The Commission is working to improve the efficiency and effectiveness of transit connections. In order to meet these requirements, the Commission has worked with Metrolink and local transit operators to offer connecting services to and from Riverside County Metrolink stations at no cost for those with valid Metrolink tickets. Within Riverside County, services include free transfers to routes operated by Riverside Transportation Agency (RTA), RTA's Commuter Link service and Corona Cruiser. The following graphs show total monthly Metrolink transfer passenger trips on each of the three services. Agenda Item 7K 43 3,500 3,000 2,500 2,000 1,500 1,000 Passenger Trips RTA Fixed Route Month , PJ� ge Monthly Metrolink transfer trips on RTA's connecting fixed routes (1, 3, 15, 16, 21 29, and 38) totaled 3,153 for the month of September, a decrease of 264 trips, and - 7.73% less than the month of August. Monthly trips increased by 187 or 6.30% over last year. Passenger Trips RTA Commuter Link 10,000 9,000 a,000 T. w 7,000 6,000 5,000 4,000 01 �0 0 Al 0 � ,p0 `� � 0 �0 0 tb e C ‘e e �a�° Aga � QQ 4sa� �•c<° �o / Month Monthly Metrolink transfer trips on RTA's Commuter Link routes (202, 204, 206, 208, and 210) totaled 8,139 for the month of September, a decrease of 1,237 trips, and 13.19% less than the month of August. Monthly trips have increased by 3,005 or 58.53% over the last year. Agenda Item 7K 44 OM sun mimeo We Imes stem Bey at %ZL %Z4 %6 %84 %Z %94 MI. 54,£4 %9 LO deg SA 80 de5 96uB4'J 0/0 %4 %Z %4' %0 %0 %9 %Z %4 %9- 80 MN SA 80 d8S e6ue4O % %4 Z8E'L4 Z94'Z 494'9 198'L Z4£'9 86L Z59'£4 LZ9'L 09Z'4 80 daS %Z- 444'L4 E04'Z E64'9 4S8'L L££'9 891 889'£4 145'L 1.1.5'4 80DoV %4 68Z`84 444'Z 484'S 4£0'8 949'9 909 441'81. Z46'L 999'4 go !or %9 0£6`14 404'Z ZZ£'S 998'L 949'9 46L Z16'£4 Z4L'L Len, BOunP %4 £44`94 89Z'Z OL614 4I. VL 68£'S 99L ££5'£4 LSZ'L 69l'4 80 Avw %4 46L'44 69£`Z 800'9 £94'L 944'9 LLL 90'£4 ££8'9 44Z'4 80idV %E 064044 004`Z 486'4 £64'L 094'9 09L 966'Z4 SLL'9 £EZ'4 90JgW %0 8SE'E4 96£'Z 4Z9'4 9L8'9 $00'9 641 ten 4 L99'9 84Z`4 80 god %L ZZE`E4 00£`Z L9917 ZOO'L £84'9 44L £OZ'Z4 948'9 914'4 80 uef %L- 0£9'04 004'Z ZZ9'4 4£9'9 466'4 4E9 8L£`44 4£4`9 OM'£ L0380 %Z 859`£4 Z££'Z 46617 480'L 99Z`9 44L 65£'Z4 £LL'9 644'4 10 noN %4 L81`Z4 4Z£'Z Z6L'4 8£9'9 ZEZ`9 OZL 0££`Z4 £L9'9 8L0'4 L0PO %Z £`LE`Z4 46l'Z 941'4 9L9'9 £9Z'S Z69 ZOO'Z4 64L'9 £90'4 10 daS J ,'7Yr 99fi•�Iki ',..- 4 u 25k V . n..i . • .. ...n..r i...�.�.. it rr"»v`.; t 02 � Sl �1 � ... .n ...�l�1>�1kk2a�1-.i> 1 .n. . [:'..^ a ...t i'"' . i 1nv,J � 0 0 ft� ft. �ISR'�� u.. C.. .- �>lY �.! .:�, ,3, � �k�� Y:Y*+.y� 1. S .... 1_htt r l'1F�F i Y Y �Lt-�C n V� t» i y,F%v -t�4 �l..r� i �^�' Stl' #+i4� Fr R ��1 (•"��i��. ' f inri�MYT�� <d 1� `'.-4�: t44{!'N... SC'p �. �r i*+L ..n i"' 1iL{ L'..€Ii� Y1.-4•. tr-,.C'7 � " /.ttt .JY �, Y Y 1.....-.... a [, .11� /,l':2 k:. x���th �131 — :' +� �a�,i'� IJt i f �, k��lsri..l:,Z.`.}i�'h9f Y . .4.. .1... S3.Hl. 4 F V�Yt �,;�V.])RJ .S. .:ram.. • • 41 ' "s 'a t,: °'.k i®I�o��. .! R � '. F' '. 5v[ t #n w,�A}•'•{.^.,n ` F..n...n...e e..v ..... i. �... 1 1N 3 W HOVIJ_ d O31Sf1f av Ab anoH - MOONIM H1NOW N331bIH1 SdR112139N3SSVd AVCD133M 30Vt13AV MNI-102113W • m000109£ V10 •uoneinoleo awn-uo ay) u! papnpu! Lou oie 90I94 pepnuuy voneugum lulod Le awll-uo slam Aayl l! 10 PeJaplsuoo cue sulerl paieuluual •sAelep onenagu apeLu um! eney sluoui snipe oN %L9 %96 %96 7096 %66 %OOL %S6 %96 °Lull P°InPayoS}o semum 9 01411M BulM1+/ suleJl PoPad plead 0,0,6 %46 %SS %46 %66 70Z6 %96 %46 %S6 %96 %66 %96 %L6 %46 %96 %BB %98 %96 %E6 DO des 80$0tl %S6 %46 %96 %Z6 %96 70E6 %96 %96 %96 %96 %96 %66 %86 %S6 %96 %96 %99 %L6 %86 %S6 %96 %96 %96 %46 %L6 %46 %96 %46 %96 %96 %96 %96 %96 %S6 %L6 %£6 %96 70L6 901nf %S6 %96 %96 %96 %98 7046 %96 %L8 %46 %98 %96 %66 %OOL %46 %96 %06 %Z6 %L6 %96 80 LW %96 %Se %96 1;46 %96 %S6 %96 %Z6 %46 %66 %96 %OOL %001 %96 %96 %L6 %Z6 %a 7096 90AeiN %96 %96 %L6 %L6 %L6 %48 %96 %£6 %96 %Z6 %96 %66 %66 %L6 %86 %E6 3O£6 %96 %OOL 80id`d %L6 %L6 %96 %66 %66 %Z6 %L6 %L6 %LB %96 %86 %96 %66 %66 %96 %96 %£6 %96 %96 90 JeIN %L6 %L6 %L6 %SB %96 %S6 %96 %96 %£8 %96 %96 %66 %OOL %96 %96 %96 %LB %OM %66 90Qa:j %96 %S6 %96 %L6 %46 %SB %L6 %L6 %L6 %96 %96 %96 %96 %96 %96 %L6 %96 %46 %16 90 Lief %96 %96 %96 %DOI. %S6 %£8 %46 %16 %L6 %96 %98 %BB %66 %86 %96 %B9 %£6 %L6 %66 LO 000 7096 %96 %96 %96 %96 %Z6 %96 %98 % le %96 %96 %96 %OOL %96 %96 %06 %69 %BB %L6 LO A0N %46 9646 %96 %L6 %SB %£6 %L6 %96 %Z6 %ZB - %16 %LB %96 7046 %S8 %EB %LB %E8 %96 LO PO %48 %PS - %46 %L6 %L6 %96 %96 %46 %Z6 %68 %96 %96 %66 %06 %26 1/496 %Z6 %96 %96 LO das _. r.i �.. elf.. . � � .a i{ .� Y ,•,. .0 � 4� .. '� ��..R���e!ii n+F' c + r . G-{i w > ar`t ,',�i L:�.�E'�JLfYe�t����. P.�'!h�M �'Y.+!1Jk..Y,GF��P 2SA, TIN'�At�V '..Yfl Fl� ,-,., (a e ..fi1.1P�..�^h��d.95.L1•��Mk. RSA. � r ur •� 'T ' .. < .'_^, ' ' •.' gyp. kG �. 1 5H1NOW £ L 1MM/1 °lull Pampeps io sa;num g ul4lIM Bulnllly suleJl;o eBBIUGOJad 30IA213S Avam33M - AININIA f1S 33N3213HCIV 311103H3S MNI1021131N 410 1N 3 W HOVIrd • RIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION DATE: November 12, 2008 TO: Riverside County Transportation Commission FROM: Plans and Programs Committee Brian Cunanan, Commuter Assistance Manager THROUGH: Anne Mayer, Executive Director SUBJECT: State Route 91 Commuter Express Bus — Route 794 PLANS AND PROGRAMS COMMITTEE AND STAFF RECOMMENDATION: This item is for the Commission to approve continued demonstration funding of State Route 91 Commuter Express Bus — Route 794 service using Measure A Commuter Assistance Program funds in an amount not to exceed $142,000. BACKGROUND INFORMATION: At its July 10, 2002 meeting, the Commission approved an allocation of $400,000 in Measure A Commuter Assistance Program (CAP) funds to cover the Commission's share for a two-year demonstration express bus route (Route 794) along the SR-91 Freeway corridor, in partnership with Orange County Transportation Authority (OCTA) and the Riverside Transit Agency (RTA). Additionally, this action put a 50/50 split on the funding responsibility (based on county traveled mileage) for the Riverside County portion of the project evenly between the Commission and RTA while OCTA funds Orange County's share of the total operational costs. Service for the Route 794 demonstration project began in September 2006 and operates weekdays, departing five morning trips from Riverside, along with two additional morning trips departing from Corona destined for Costa Mesa. At its September 13, 2006 meeting, the Commission approved the request from RTA for the Commission to provide 100% of RTA's share of the demonstration project costs from the original allocation in an amount not to exceed $120,000 for FY 2006/07. At its June 13, 2007 meeting, the Commission approved use of the original allocation for a not to exceed amount of $151,000 to cover Riverside County's share (including the RTA share) during FY 2007/08. Commission action also included a requirement for RTA to report back to the Commission on a regular basis and to provide a recommendation for the continuation of funding for the project. Agenda Item 7L 48 On -October 13, 2008, RTA submitted a letter recommending continuation of funding for the demonstration project. DISCUSSION: As of July 1, 2008, $128,800 remains of the original $400,000 set aside by the Commission for the demonstration project. This amount would allow for a continuation of the service until May of 2009. Ridership statistics indicate that Route 794 is productive for both OCTA and RTA. In FY 2008, using shuttle sized coaches, the route carried 10.6 passengers per hour and had a farebox recovery ratio of 57% for OCTA and 100% for RTA. Given that this project is successful and in consideration of the RTA recommendation to continue funding the service, the staff recommendation is for the Commission to approve funding the project to the extent that the original $400,000 approved by the Commission is exhausted. Staff furtherrecommends that an additional $13,200 be allocated to ensure service operation is continued until the end of the current fiscal year. The total FY 2008/09 staff recommended funding for this service is $142,000. At the end of this fiscal year and upon approval of this item, the Commission will have met and exceeded its obligation toward this demonstration project. A final report on the Route 794 demonstration project performance and appropriateness of applying Measure A Commuter Assistance Program funds to this route after the demonstration period will be brought back to the Commission in June 2009. Financial Information In Fiscal Year Budget: Yes Year: FY 2008/09 Amount: $142,000 Source of Funds: Measure A — Commuter Assistance Budget Ad ustment: No GLA No.: 226 41 86101 P2199 Fiscal Procedures Approved: \14.6144,0,34#�e Date: 10/17/2008 Attachment: RTA Letter dated October 13, 2008 Agenda Item 7L 49 To: Robert Yates, Multi -Modal Services Director From: Mark Stanley, Director of Planning Craig Fajnor, Chief Financial Officer Date: October 13, 2008 Re: Support for OCTA Route 794 Riverside Transit Agency 1825 Third Street P.O. Box 59968 Riverside, CA 92517-1968 Phone: (951)565-5000 RTA has been providing a subsidy to the Orange County Transportation Commission (OCTA) for its commuter express route 794 for over two years. This route serves the western portion of Riverside County and continues with service into neighboring Orange County. The RTA subsidy to OCTA is in the form of Measure A funding provided by RCTC under the Commuter Assistance portion of the program. RCTC passes this funding through RTA to OCTA since RCTC is not a transit provider. RTA records only revenue and expense for this route for PIP and NTD purposes since the 794 is not an RTA-operated route. Route 794 is productive for both OCTA and RTA. In FY08, the route carried 10.6 passengers per hour and had a farebox recovery ratio of 57% for OCTA and 100% for RTA. RTA's subsidy of the 794 is approximately 30% of its cost to operate. This percentage of subsidy is based upon the miles driven in each county. As mentioned before, RTA's subsidy is in the form of Measure A (Commuter Assistance). Since service inception, funding levels have been as follows: $120,525 for FY07 $150,611 for FY08 $142,000 for FY09 (RCTC-approved SRTP) Similar to route 794, RTA operates route 149 which acts as a commuter link -like service between Riverside and Orange counties. OCTA provides a subsidy of approximately 30% of the route's operating cost. This subsidy allows route 149 to be productive with regard to RTA's farebox recovery. With the OCTA subsidy, route 149's farebox recovery was 40% in FY08. Without the subsidy, the route's farebox recovery was 10% in FY08. In addition, the OCTA subsidy allows for the preservation of precious LTF funds (approximately $200,000 per year). RTA staff requests and recommends that RCTC continue to fund the OCTA route 794 subsidy at current percentage levels — and corresponding dollar values - with Measure A funds. Please let us know if you have any additional questions. We look forward to moving forward with support of OCTA route 794. Regards, Mark Stanley and Craig Fajnor 50 • • • RIVERS/DE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION COMM/SS/ON DATE: November 12, 2008 TO: Riverside County Transportation Commission FROM: Plans and Programs Committee Tanya Love, Goods Movement Manager THROUGH: Anne Mayer, Executive Director SUBJECT: Update on Ports of Los Angeles and Long Beach Projects Expansion PLANS AND PROGRAMS COMMITTEE AND STAFF RECOMMENDATION: This item is for the Commission to receive an update on the San Pedro Ports' proposed expansion projects. BACKGROUND INFORMATION: In November 2007, staff was directed to monitor expansion projects proposed by the Ports of Los Angeles and Long Beach in order to research opportunities to mitigate the negative impacts of delays caused by increased freight and truck traffic. Since that time, the ports proposed the following expansion projects: • China Shipping Container Terminal Project - Port of Los Angeles — Berths 97-109; and • Middle Harbor Redevelopment Project — Port of Long Beach. To effectively respond to the environmental impact reports on both expansion projects, staff requested the assistance of the Commission's legal counsel as well as staff from the on -call consulting firm of Kimley-Horn and Associates, Inc. Following is an overview of the written comments submitted to the ports regarding increased rail and truck traffic as well as air quality impacts. China Shipping Container Terminal • Although State Routes 60 and 91 and Interstate 15 serve as key transportation corridors for freight movement to and from the ports; the draft EIS/EIR did not evaluate traffic impacts in Riverside County; • Project is projected to handle 1,164,400 and 1,551,000 twenty -foot equivalent units (TEU) in 2015 and 2030 respectively. About 50% of the containers are for local delivery within the South Coast Air Basin (SCAB); approximately 13.5% will be destined for national markets by 2030; Agenda Item 7M 51 • The project will generate 303,996 train trips to and from off -dock rail yards by 2030; • 634,864 annual truck trips within the SCAB and an additional 170,762 annual truck trips outside the SCAB district is projected; • The project's region of influence (R01) is defined as five counties: Los Angeles, Orange, Riverside, San Bernardino and Ventura; however the impact analysis is focused only on the port and its surrounding areas. The following table provides an overview of the cumulative effect of vehicle delay as a result of the additional containers: Vehicle -Hours of Delay (Daily) Year 2005 Year 2030 Without Project 809.5 4,321.8 With Project 845.8 4,441.0 Difference 36.3 119.2 • Although the impact to air quality is significant, the draft document did not address the impacts to Riverside County: Potential Change in Emissions (grams per day) Due to Increased Idling at Rail Crossings in Riverside County Year 2005 Year 2030 Particulate Matter (PM,o) 3.8 12.9 Nitrous Oxides (NOx) 213 705 Volatile Organic Compounds (VOC) 613 2,016 Carbon Monoxide (CO) 8,777 28,878 Greenhouse Gases (CO2 Equivalent) 16,611 54,545 Middle Harbor Redevelopment Project • Although SR-60, SR-91, and 1-15 serve as key transportation corridors for freight movement to and from the ports, the draft EIS/EIR did not evaluate traffic impacts in Riverside County; • Project is estimated to handle 2,21 1,751 and 3,320,000 TEUs in 2015 and 2030 respectively. About 76% of the containers will be moved by trucks; approximately 24% will be moved by trains; • Project will generate an estimated 2,098 annual trains by 2030 and 10,112 daily truck trips by 2030 (1,308,160 annual truck trips); • The project's ROI is defined as five counties: Los Angeles, Orange, Riverside, San Bernardino and Ventura; however the impact analysis is focused only on the port and its surrounding areas. The following table provides an overview of the cumulative effect of the additional containers: Agenda Item 7M • 52 • • Vehicle -Hours of Delay (Daily) Year 2005 Year 2030 Without Project 793.9 4,266.9 With Project 845.8 4,441.0 Difference 51.9 174.1 • Although the impact to air quality is significant, the draft document did not address the impacts to Riverside County that would occur as residents wait for trains at at -grade crossings: Potential Change in Emissions (grams per day) Due to Increased Idling at Rail Crossings in Riverside County Year 2005 Year 2030 Particulate Matter (PM10) 5.4 18.6 Nitrous Oxides (NOx) 303.3 1,025.2 Volatile Organic Compounds (VOC) 875 2,941.6 Carbon Monoxide (CO) 12,537.4 42,137 Greenhouse Gases (CO2 Equivalent) 23,749 79,666 Staff Recommendation Both projects, although reviewed separately, would have a cumulative negative impact on traffic delays and air quality for Riverside County residents. The Commission's written responses (signed by Chair Stone) urged the ports to consider and analyze all of the potential environmental impacts before determining whether the Board of Harbor Commissioners should certify the EIS/EIR and approve the projects. Additionally, the Commission extended an offer to meet with port management to further discuss the impacts that the port's actions are projected to have in order to develop feasible mitigation. Since that time, the Port of Los Angeles has contacted the Commission and Chair Stone requesting a meeting. The Port of Long Beach has not yet responded although the period to receive written responses has passed. Staff's recommendation is to continue to monitor the ports' activities; if the concerns identified are not addressed, staff will seek further direction from the Commission. Agenda Item 7M 53 • RIVERS/DE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION COMM/SS/ON DATE: November 12, 2008 TO: Riverside County Transportation Commission FROM: Budget and Implementation Committee Theresia Trevino, Chief Financial Officer THROUGH: Anne Mayer, Executive Director SUBJECT: Sales Tax Revenues Update BUDGET AND IMPLEMENTATION COMMITTEE AND STAFF RECOMMENDATION: This item is for the Commission to: 1) Receive and file the report on Measure A and Local Transportation Fund (LTF) revenues; and 2) Receive and file the sales tax analysis for Quarter 2, 2008. BACKGROUND INFORMATION: Measure A and LTF revenues represent the two largest revenue sources for the Commission. Accordingly, regular monitoring of these revenues is important to determine the available funding for the Commission's programs, projects, and services. Since FY 1998/99, staff has internally monitored Measure A and LTF sales tax receipts on a monthly basis for trend indications as well as for budgeting and forecasting purposes. This report is included as Attachment 1. At its December 2007 meeting, the Commission awarded an agreement to MuniServices, LLC for quarterly sales tax reporting services plus additional fees contingent on additional sales tax revenue generated from the transactions and use tax (sales tax) audit services. The services performed under this agreement pertain to only the Measure A sales taxes, not including the LTF, and represent an external monitoring mechanism. The sales tax reporting services provided by MuniServices relate to the Measure A sales taxes reported and remitted to the State Board of Equalization (SBOE) for the most recently completed quarter. There is an approximate two -month lag before the Measure A sales taxes, as well as the LTF sales taxes, are received by the Commission. Estimated payments are made to the Commission the first two months in a quarter, and an adjusted clean-up payment for actual amounts in the Agenda item 9 54 previous quarter plus an estimated payment are made in the last month of each quarter. Accordingly, there is about a one -quarter lag in the actual sales tax results as reported by MuniServices. Internal Monitoring of Sales Tax Revenues During the second half of FY 2006/07, staff began to notice signs of a slowing economy with the receipt of the last payment for each quarter. These payments included the clean-up portion and were lower than the corresponding month in the prior year. This trend has continued through September 2008. FY 2006/07, however, had the highest level of receipts in Commission history. The subprime mortgage crisis during mid-2007 started to affect housing and related consumer spending on auto sales and construction. By December 2007, the impact of the crisis on sales tax receipts and the Inland Empire economy was noticeable. Accordingly, staff recommended the following mid -year reductions to the original Measure A and LTF revenue estimates for FY 2007/08. The Commission approved these revenue adjustments at the February 2008 meeting. FY 2007/08 Revenue Projections Measure A LTF Original (January 2007) $ 167,100,000 77,840,000 FY 2007/08 Budget $165,600,000 77,840,000 Revised for Mid -Year Adjustment $ 135,000,000 67,000,000 Decrease from Budget $ 30,600,000 10,840,000 Actual Revenues $ 142,537,500 69,313,400 During the first half of calendar year 2008, the trend in sales tax receipts did not appear to be as severe as the revised mid -year projection of $135 million for Measure A and $67 million for LTF; however, due to the uncertainty in the economy, staff did not adjust the revenue projections again. Actual Measure A and LTF revenues for FY 2007/08 were above these projections at $142.5 million and $69.3 million, respectively. From March 2008 through October 2008, monthly sales tax receipts have continued to decline from the same period in the prior year, which has been unprecedented in the last decade. During this period, the subprime mortgage crisis has evolved into a national, and even global, credit crisis that reached epic proportions in September and early October 2008. The extent of this latest crisis on sales tax receipts is difficult to predict. External Sales Tax Audit and Reporting Services In its first nine months, MuniServices has generated and submitted approximately 60 sales tax audit findings to the SBOE for review and determination of errors in sales tax reporting. During Quarter 3 (Q3) 2008 (July through September 2008), Agenda item 9 • • 55 • the SBOE has approved 20 of these claims, which were discovered in Quarter 1 2008 (January through March 2008), for a total sales tax revenue recovery of $140,825. If the SBOE concurs with the error(s) for the remaining claims, the Commission would receive additional revenues; however, the magnitude of the value of the remaining findings was not available. It is important to note that while the recoveries of additional revenues will be tangible, it will not be sufficient to alter the overall trend of sales tax revenues. Additionally, MuniServices has provided the Commission with the quarterly sales tax report for the second quarter (Q2) of calendar 2008 (April through June 2008). Most of the Q2 2008 Measure A sales taxes were received by the Commission in Q3 2008 due to the lag noted earlier. This report includes an analysis of regional performance by economic categories and the three largest economic segments as well as an analysis of the quarter's cash receipts and the top 25 sales tax contributors. The executive summary section of the Q2 2008 report is included as Attachment 2 to the staff report. Additionally, Attachment 3 presents the same information on page 2 of the executive summary with specific results for Riverside County (RCTC column). The following observations were noted in the Q2 2008 report: • Areas such as the Inland Empire and Sacramento Valley that had experienced high growth in the past few years related to housing impacts are continuing to experience the lowest, and actually negative, growth at -7.2% and -6.6%; respectively. • In almost every region, the most significant declines continue to be in the construction and transportation categories. General retail declines have increased but are less severe than those for construction and transportation. Food products is the only economic category that has any growth in all regions; however, for Riverside County, there was a decline of -.8% in Q2 2008. • The Inland Empire experienced the worst decline in sales taxes at -7.2% with Riverside County's decline of -8.8% higher than that of San Bernardino County. • The three largest economic segments in the Inland Empire are new auto sales, service stations, and department stores. Declines have continued for new auto sales and department stores at -18.4% and -2.4%, respectively, while service stations continue to increase at 9% primarily due to the increasing fuel costs. • Over the last two-year period, the Q2 2008 sales tax levels were at the low points for all but the food products and miscellaneous categories. In terms of the ten largest economic segments, which comprise about 76% of the total sales taxes for Riverside County, service stations were at the high point and new auto sales, wholesale building materials, miscellaneous retail, light industry, and retail building materials were at the low point. Agenda item 9 56 The negative effects of the housing market troubles on the construction and transportation categories continued during Q2 2008. Additionally, a decline in consumer spending continued to have a more significant impact on the general retail category. The rising fuel costs that continued through Q2 2008 had a positive impact with increased sales taxes from service stations. Current decreases in fuel prices in the fourth quarter (Q4) 2008 related to the overall economic slowdown can be expected to impact sales tax receipts from service stations. Next Steps The MuniServices reports include a Measure A sales tax forecast based on pessimistic, most likely, and optimistic considerations. The Q2 2008 report forecast for FY 2008/09 ranges from $131 million to $141 million, with $134 million as most likely; however, this is subject to change as more quarterly data related to FY 2008/09 will be received in subsequent months. The FY 2008/09 budget for Measure A revenues is $135 million. While sales tax receipts through October 2008 for Measure A and LTF are about 11.4% and 9.8%, respectively, below the prior year's four -month period, staff believes that the six-month period through December 2008 will provide a better snapshot of the impacts of these crises on sales tax receipts. As a result, any adjustments to the FY 2008/09 budget as well as FY 2009/10 projections will be presented at the January or February 2009 Commission meetings. Attachments: 1) Measure A and LTF Monthly Comparison 2) Quarter 2, 2008 Executive Summary 3) Quarter 2, 2008 Economic Category and Segments Analysis with focus on RCTC (Excerpt from Full Report) Agenda item 9 • 57 %40'9 %00'001 918'4L£'941 %OS'L %ZZ'SZ 9W/69'11 %9V9 %L l'9Z 49Z'9£l'Z1 %14'L %09'4Z 608'Z09'11. %56'Z %08'£Z 816'9E0'11$ %94'901 940'000'3 lunouy pepelad 009'4L6'£4$ 9500'9 %00'001 9L9'4L£'949 7f101 %Z9'92 %NT- %O4'E- %96'BL %' 9Z'9- %80't %Stet %ZZ'L %2Z'81 %let1- %08'41 560941 %/I'll S90'09l'S 3Nnr 0AZO'9 00L'61L'E AVW %E0'9 001'e6L1 'ildV %EV1.1 699'L6Z'S 'NVW %90'9 DOLY£L'£ '93d %0C9 000'901'£ 'Nyr %WM 609'E LL'4 '030 %LO'9 00Z'9lL'E 'AON %C9'9 001'CLO'E '130 %ZZB 81VZ19'C 'd39 %0613 006'LZL't •OnV %89'9 006'960'£S •lnr Ad Wad eseasul 1V101 JO 1NnOWo NINON % EOM Ad dll 85 %Z9'01 %00'001 9Z6'ZEL'E4$ %OB'S %NW Y00'Z88'01 %9C8 %Z L'9Z Y4Z'134'11 9699'91 968041 L99'60001 %LL'£L 9115'4Z 011'03C01$ %EY'Z01 9Z9'9E0'1$ lunouy papefad 0041,69'Z4$ %Z9'01. %WOOL 9Z6'Z£L'C49 T1101 %Z£'£- %CVO 40S'EZ1'4 3Nnr VIZL %£B'S 000198'E AVW %int %Z949 00S'9691 '2IdV %661r- %9l'OL trIWC54'4 INA MSS!.. %OL'S 009'Le6'£ '03J %MI. %E2'9 00C'9967 'NW %9COZ %Z9'0L L9Z1,69'4 '030 9598'll %£6'L - 006'994'e 'AON %99'LL %WS 006'66WZ '100 %1071 14Z1'01 01.8'LZ1 Y 'd3S 91,06'£1 %UV 009'989'e 'Onv %06'E1 %L1'9 000989'Z9 in' Ad Wad 1V101 JO 1NnOWo H1NOW (MOM! %. 10/00 Ad ill %9C93 %00'001 91 VC£S'6CS %66'11 MOSZ 890'98Z'01 %99'EZ %L992 BZVZOS'01 %29'11 %OYEZ 91f'89V6 %C9491 %L6'CZ OLE'LL4'6$ %9C'111 SLL•EEO'4$ lunouy pe1091.0.1d 000'009'9ES %9CS1 %00'001 S1l'EES'6ES Ti101 %L9'4 %6C01 SSO'S9Z'4 3Nnr %9S'L1 %GCB 000'04iE AVW %9S'Ll %CS'S 000'0997 'Nerd %99'OS %99'11 ez0'Leso VIVI %SZ'S %WS 00l'EZE'E '83J %SZ'9 %0C'9 00C'Z61,1 'NW %106 %CL'6 81C'91,9'E '330 %/VV. %WI. OOE'e60'E 'AON %Lf'ft %99'9 OOL'CZE'Z '100 %e6'LZ %00'01 016'Z96'E 'd3S %LL'S %66'1. sown CE 'OnV %919 %66'S 009'L9£'ZS 'lnr Ad urosi 1V101 40 1NnOWV KNOW eataoul % 00/6fi Ad ill %00'001 949' 1 S 1'4M %06'9Z 81L'L81'6 0.010 %£8'42 981'6L08 £Or0 %LZ'4Z 8E9'89V8 Z 410 %00'4Z ZOL'961'8$ L Or0 %6V601 949'106'Z$ wnouy pepafald 000'09Z'1C9 %00'001 949'IS l'4£$ ld101 9616'11 918'990'0 3Nnr %CST 00Z'9Z6'Z AVW %£4'9 - o0Cbelt '21dV %01'6 99e'90l'£ WWI %WS 006'690'£ '83J 31.4L'9 00410£1 'NVf %LZ'Ol 9C6'009'C '030 %00'9 000'££CZ 'AON %00'9 0006401 '130 4540'6 ZOL'990'C 'd3S %SS'S 009116'Z 'env 4514'9 oos'esvzs •lnr 1V101 JO 1NOOWV NINON % 68yS6 Ad Jll NOSrdVd1•100 KIH1NOIN S1d130314 XVl SrIVS All %ZS'S %00'001 069'004'06$ %WS %00'001 4C9'694'684 %COSL %00'001 ZEL'£t418$ %00'001 SZ8'96VOLS %ZS'S %69'SZ 1Z94Z91'1.Z 0IVO %YL'S %NW 069'S9Z'ZZ 0410 %£6'01 %96'9Z 952'1391'1Z 0/110 %ll'L2 6L£'£80'61 0MO %9C'4 %48'SZ ZYE'L86'tZ CrVO %£6'L %£S9Z 699'LWCZ CND 86880'LZ %L9'9Z 8C9'66L'1Z COr0 %L£'4Z toot.l'LL EOrO %WC %ZL'4Z 84199L'ZZ ZNO .%WEL %0931 094'916'12 ZruD %SVC!. %69'£Z 86L'8l£'Bl 2r1r0 9,0EZ'4Z 468'£90'L1 ZiUO %SC'S %9E'4Z 8L9'Z66'ZZ$ 1410 %LO'El %Otis 516119.13 1410 9129'Z3 %89'£Z 000'C LC'S LS 1410 %9£'4Z 946'941'L IS LOro %LC901. 088'091'99 %9VZOL PC9'096'19 lunouy papefad 000'05Z'68$ ;unowy papefad 000'009'L9$ %MS %00'001 069'001469 1V101 %CCOC %all LZ9'9Z6'0L 3Nnr %963" %DOT 000'911'L AVW %L9'4- %10'9 000'8L9'9 21dte %S0'91. %96'01 zwLes'Ot 'MVW %Ze'L- %WS 009'90L'L '83A %WE %19'9 00t'£C✓9 'NW %9C'0 %13616 844'6Lt'6 '030 %1S'9 MO'S 000'8Z9'L 110N %in %90'9 OK'LZCS '100 %MS- %CC8 ea'a a 'd3S 959C41 %CST 006'10'8 'Ono %Boil %0C9 000SZE'99 'lnr Ad Wad 1V101 d0 1NOOWo NINON aseamul % Z0l10 AA y anseety 411 L 1N3WHOVIr' %1L'6 %00'001 K9'094'699 1V101 %0S'9- 96bf'6 060'89CS 3Nnr %WC& %88'8 009'106'L AVW %WEL %99.8 001.996'9 'Ndo %591- %L6'6 69V91613 'WIN %0£'02 %6Z46 000'SLE'8 '83d %94'0Z %L6'9 000E2'9 'NW %WTI %64'01 - 096'ZBE'6 '030 %E£'£L %LO'S 000'Z9VL 'AON %££'£t %00'9 009'LLE'S '100. %90'£l %£OSI. -911'CL613 'd3S %9671 %Ire 006'£0E'L 'Ono %86'Zl %91'9 006'L09'98 'lnf Ad WOJJ 1V101 JO 1NnOWV NINON esea0ul % 10l00 AA y anseen • 9596'011 ZEL'990'9$ lunowV papefad 000'L94'ELS 96£9'91 %00'001 ZEL'E49'19$ 111101 %LZ'OL %66'01. 959'61,61 3Nnf %9C'S %SS'S 002'666'9 AVW %4C % %60'9 000'603'9 lidV %69'99, 5568'11 9L9'1,99'6 '2iVW %LS'S %84'S 009'116'9 '83d %£C9 %9C'9 09eLL L'S 'NW %E6'£L %C1'01 861'69Z9 '030 Mtn %SCI 009'61£'9 'AON %Ifni. %LB'S 009'6EL1, '100 %0W91 %CC6 04C'LE6'L 'd3S 94Z1'01 %L6'L 004'009'9 'Ony 9421'01 %96'S 00E'SL8'4$ 'inr Ad Wad 11(101 JO 1NnOWV NINON saeaoul % 00/66 Ad y anseaw %LZ'LOL 9ZWile4s ;snowy papefad 000'9E9'99 9 %ono' 9Z8'96£'OL$ M101 %Ole 1l 6Ls'880'8 3Nnr %81.16 00Z'694'9 AVW %44'9 009'9£93' ildli %£Z'8 L01.361:9 '21VW %WEI 001'L94'9 '83J %68'9 ooe'oe9'4 'Nyr %0£'01 460'64Z'L '030 %sort, o0£'e09'S 'AON 91L8'S OOS'toe'4 '100 %6916 84L'elle9 'd3S %6£'S 000'£06'S 'OM %6Z'9 00tat'4$ •lnr 1V101 JO 1NnOWo NINON Y. 66l86 A4 y anseew NOSIa7dN100 AlH1N01111 S1d130311 XVl S3lliS V 321f1SV3W NOISSIWWOO N011V.1 10dSNVM1 A1NI100 301$213A • • %99'4l %00'001 011161'4/1 %1911 %00101 ZLL'1,809$ %£B'£l %00101 91.0'811198 %LS'E1 %Z4411 000'11,V11, ►NO %I4'L %UV SW11Z11 4N0 164611 %9C'9Z 98E16011 %LY9 %UV 066'L0L11 ENO 969S'91, %1L'9Z 098'91111 fN0 - 561911 %141Z 6EC4111L %LS'OZ %ZCSZ 49E180'61 ZAO %6611 %NW 6Z4'4£911 ZNO %£V£1 %9Z'4Z 4L V'L88'£1 %89'L1 BLSZ'42 99E166'L L$ tN0 %EY11 %L91Z L86'88Z11$ 1DM %EtLI. %LirEZ 914'OZL11.8 %1VL11, 01/10011S lunowV pep4lad 000'OBL'£9$ %89'41, %00'001 01/161'4LS 1V101 101'61 %MI 0091a/ 3Nnr %ES'S %LZ'B 0091£11 AVIS %WS %0Z'9 009'660 11dV %WO• %1011. 06Z'CZYL 'MAW %LZ11, %691 009'91.1.1 '93d 96IZ11 96Z91 00£1£144 'NW 96Z91Z %Ora 491'LS01 '030 %6E11 %EL'L me'L£CS 'AON %BE11 966L'S . 008.96n '100 %9E1Z %9L'01 991'666'4 .'d3S %WEL %0L'L 008'601:S '011V %991 %LL'S 00419Z'48 'lnr Ad 1110Jd 11110110 mum/ H1NOW 84Qu8111 % 90190 Ad All %6Z101 Z11'lZ9'£S tummy pepa(eld. 00019L'09S 401911 %OM!. ZLL'189'49$ - 14101 %EL'L- %LSO 94,4'6£4'9 34111r %96'91, %991 00031S'S AVW %ZZ'LI %849 00019VV '21dV %1062 %11'I1 OSZ'Z59'L 'WA %'L3'L1 %L91 006'9651 '33d %LZ'LI %031 00L'L611, 'NW %LO'Ll %Z9'01, - 6ZS'89131 '030 %99'14 %E9'L 0094fS0'S 'AON %OWLL %L8'9 001'16L'£ '100 %SOS %09'6 L84'0£C1 'd3S %0Z'11, %9L'L o0L'£to'S 'env %S9'91 9611'9 009'466'ES 'lnr Ad LuOJA 1V101 d0 iNnOWV H1N01/1 aseeloul - % SONG Ad ALl %BL'OL l 9 L O'ZL9'SS lunouy pelos(eld 00W/49' 10 %Ent 1600'001 91013VeLS$ 74101 %99'12 %Olt 9841999 3N11r %1911 %4E'S 00e1/LL'4 AVW %£4'8t %8S'9 004.594E 'NdV %OS'9Z %CVO' 6E616L1 '2PoW' %UV %GCB 0061Z01 '33d %UV %6S1 001,1LL'E 'NW %Mr1 %E9'01 4lS'6961 '030 %9911 4'461 0091ZS'4 'AON %t8'S %CB'S 00116E1 '100 %LZ'EZ %9101 9L01C91 'd3S 961(91 %OWL 00210V4 'env %£Z'8 %LOS 009'19E19 'lnr Ad wad 114101 d0 LmOWV H1NOW eseuaul % 40!£0 Ad All • %S4'8 %WOOL E41446e098 %On SSWSZ LZ£'98eeI %9Z1 914141Z 84113LL'Zl %WEI %NW - EZS'49011, %WS %/VW 944'119'1LS %LZ101, E4S'91S'ZS lunowV paloe(eld 00£'9LL'L4$ %We %0010I. E49'46Z'05$ 1V101 %18'£ %69401, LZ4'LLE'S 3Nnr %1611, %Vie 004'6EZIT AVW %WEL %UV 0091L11 'WV %It'll- %E016 envn9'4 'WIN 941711Z %9£1 0091049 '33d %£911 %201 00S'LES1 'NW %Ma %CIVIL CZ94991 '030 %8011 %£LS 009'0603, 'AON 9419'0 9641'9 006'9901 '100 %£131 9646'6 91,9'teel/ 'd3S %OWL- %SS'1 002'86C£ 'env 95Z61 %1Z'9 004421,18 -Inc Ad weld 1V101d0 1NnOWV H1N01111 asealouI % COMO Ad All NOSIMVd1N00 AlH1NOW S1d130321 XVl S3lVS All %9£'SL %00101 6Z010Z1S LS. %9£71 %00101 9136'91S'4E IS %141,1 %00101 ZZC1E9'LI IS %ZS'S %00101 LOVL491014 %601% 96463,Z EE8'EOL'9£ 411V0 9519'6 %£L5Z Z90109'EE 4N0 %Ka 15ZZ'9Z LSE'14,91£ 41110 %OWL %ELVZ SL14Z98.5Z 43L0 9102IS %WIZ 90S1S91£ £NO %t8'8t 143L1Z 6L61£61E £NO %WEL 961,C93 E49'L111£ £NO %MS 4581Z L991a9Z END %9Z1Z %661Z 40114E'04 ZMO %1911 %£5'4Z 815.9661E ZNO %001 %LZ'9Z 496'E449Z Z-0/0 %LL'Ll %9131Z 14 L'LLV9Z ZNO %6E'LL %COW 98S'LOE'LES LND %8l'84 95Z91Z - 8Z4'SLL'LES LND 400'91 %081Z BS6'666'LZS LND %911 %LO'£Z 14913/1Z$ 1N0 %8L'9tL 6Z019ZIZS tunouy peloerud 000'4Z6'ZEtS %OE'S 1 %91'LZ %£S'S %En %ZS1- %0S'4L %0S'4L %VWte %6E'4L %8£'4L %Ont. %SM. %9L11, %00101 6Z0'90Z1914 1V101 %SCOL EC8199'91 341n1' %111 00418S11 AVM %801 0091E4'8 lldV %6L1 909146411 'WM %IL'S 003'0E911 '83d %CS'9 004'041'01 'NV4 %6911 40110£S'61, '030 %991 000'Z69'll 'AON %9L'S 000'616'9 '100 %IVOl 981'L0011 'd3S %491 00Z191,$1 'env %891 ooZ'9ZL'BS 'inr Ad w01d 84e819U1 1V101 AO 1NnOWV KNOW % 901S0 Ad V alnseeW %LSLOI 996'91 CBS lunouy petoe(eld 000'001,1M %S£'4l %0010 l 99611,91.£ 14 114101 %19'4 %OM. %STU WSW %0E11 %0E11 %6L'oZ %EL'ZL %EL'ZL %Peel %89'OL %9L'9l %MI Z9416911 3111-11" 9649`8 006184'1,4 AVW %Lte9 0008191 '21dV %9E'tt 8L9'£LZ'SL %8L'8 00809'11 113d %IWO OOl'9S9'8 'NW 9610'11 81£'908'41 '030 MCC 00196E'01, YON %OS'S 001,'L6L'L '100 %0011 SZE191,11 'd3S %09'L o06'BZZbt 'env 96Z049 OOZ'£60'8$ 'lnr Ad uwld 84ee18Ul 11/101 AO 1NnOWV H1N041 % - 9000 Ad V elnseayL %46'901 ZZL'4EVLS lunouy 144104(41d 000/66/03 %L4`4L 9600101 ZZL1E9'LL t$ 74101 %4L'ZZ %OL'SL 961111 %LVIZ %We 449'6 %8Z'Z %60' L L %09'OL %OZ'4Z %£9'8t %WO %%et4 arm:0v 3Nnr %9Z'8 oorm'6 AVW %in 000'999'L '21dV %L011 £40'01'11 'WIN 9646'9 00019'01 '93d %0C9 006'998'L 'NV( %/VOL V91481E11 '030 %891 00L'ILZ'6 'AON %WV 0081S13'9 '100 %SO'OI 13911Z8'14 'd3S %991 009'L4Z'6 'OnV %691 00VIE6'9$ 'lnr Ad weld a4euoul 114101 d0 1NnOWV 141N01/1 % 40/CO AA V unseaW 96E0'901 Z9Z1481.3 lunouy peloe(o1d SZCOL616S %Z6'9 %00101 L06'119103 1V101 %En 9669'11 %1Z11 %LS'S- 40S9'4Z %ZS' L L %L81Z %01/1 %O61 %09'SL %9S'L- %9Z' L %99'01 9L911611 3N114 %0Z'9 006'0E48 AVW %9Z'9 008'LZ4'9 lidV %LSO L461LL1 '3V1/11 1%4E1 000'909'6 '33d %00'L ooe'E6VL 'NW %1E1.1 410E40'Z1 '030 %Z1'9 00911/CS 'AON %Z1,1 omeLBZ•9 '100 %9Z'6 1L1,1ZS'6 'd3S %84Y 00116L'L 'env %E2'9 000106'9S 'lnr Ad weld assaloul 1V101 AO 1NOOINV H1N018 K £ono AA V unseeW NOSIMVd14100 AlH1NOW S1d1303N XVl SMVS V 32111SV3W NOISSIWW00 NOIIV1210dSI M1 A1N1100 301%13AIM V 3 3 V 3 3 V 3 %6l'06 3 %MSS V %99'86 3 %69'96 3 uospedwo0 pelsn(pV • V 01A gewO43-3 V 3 3 V 3 3 V 3 %99'88 3 %6L'88 V %Z8'96 3 %Z9'S6 3 uospsdwo0 pelsnlpV • V 01A e1ewlls3.3 • 09 SL£'£191L3 %6 ES- %00'00l L49'699'OLS %LEE %00'00l ZZ4'99L1PL$ O 44/0 %1£'8- %4L'EZ 09V9Z8'91 0410 %MO- %991.Z 14E 9291. 4410 O C410 %6£'L- %60'SZ £Z6'99L'Ll E4DO %LS'E- %£L'4Z LZZ'040'91, EIVO 00S'LLB'4 ZNO %0£'S- %LL'4Z 01:4'914LL Z1110 %60'0 %SS'SZ CO9'660'61 Z410 81.9'96E913 t NO %L9'Z- %94'9Z 4L0'69E131S L 4+0 %El'L %8L'9Z LSZ'4LZ'6IS L 410 pin uy peP4191d 000'000'L9S %WC- %64'LZ- %9E'l- %9E't• BLE'£l9'LZS 1V101 O 3Nnr O AVW O 21dd O 21VW O '83A O 'NW O 030 0 'AON 009'LL9'4 J.00 8l£'94L'b 'd3S 000'998'9 'env 009'09E9S 'lnr Ad wold ese910u1 1V101 AO lNnOWV H1NOW % 60/80 AA All %L8'90L C49'698'ES lunouy pe{oe(Wd 000'000'L9S %6l'S- %4L'OZ- %SO' L- SO'l- %£8'4• %£YO %WO %%'61- %94'S- %£0'Z %4821- %ZB'E %ME %0800L [491398'0LS 1V101 %LS'L 094'L9E'S 3Nnr 554E6 000'849'9 AVW %E6'9 000'1.161, lAdV %ZL'L CZ L'£LV9 IiNW 16E616 009'L£0'L 133A °AWL 00Z'8LZ'9 'NVr %99'L 000'LL£'9 '330 %6L'6 009'6E6'9 'AON 554E'L 009'40E9 '130 %En 1401.49'9 'd3S 9698'6 000'086'9 'Or1V 5982L 000'S£Z'SS 'lnr Ad wad MMWOu1 1tl101 AO 1NnOWV 411410141 % 80/L0 AA All %68'66 (8LS'CLPO lunoury peloa(ald 000'0981+LS %LL'O %tB'LL- %O6'L %06'L %SYZZ- %L9'B %60'6 %Men- %90'9Z %99'8L 9641'9- %SL'LL ME Li %00'00L ZZ4099L'bL$ 1V101 %90'6 140'ZLL'9 3410r %98'8 00C'LL9'9 AVW 4949'9 000'E961, 11dV %0L'L LZ6'901'9 111661 36L£'6 00VL00'L '83d %90'L 008'9LZ'9 'NW %l6'8 £OL1999'9 '030 %Z8'6 00 L'O4E'L 'AON 99Z8'9 008'00l'9 '100 40,0'01 L9£'909'L 'd3S %66'8 004'0E9 'env %4C'9 009'Z40.9S -Inc Ad walA menu! 1V101 AO lNnOWV H1NOW % L0/60 Ad All NOSINVdIN00 A -MIAOW S1d1303U XVI S31VS All Z9£'96 EPOS %LO'L- %00'00L £89'E80'941.$ %Mt %00100L L013260'L913 0 4410 %69'L- %LB'£Z 089'9LLb£ 4410 %LL'Z- %96'EZ £88'6Z9'L£ 4410 0 E410 %8£'E• %WYK ZZ6'494'9E £N0 %987- %COW 9942bELE £410 004'L06'6 Z410 5969'LL- %191,Z 46E156'9E ZN0 %08'0 %69'9Z 8L9'699'O4 Z410 ZSB'88Z'4£S LJo0 %en- %Z9'9Z L8Z288'8ES 1410 4990'01 %Ern 12L'090'14$ L'PO lunowV peloa(Old 000'000'9E f ZS£'96L'44$ 1V101 0 3Nnr O AVW O 'WV O WO) O '83d O 'NVr O '330 O 'AON 004'L06'6 '130 Z9V01 '6 'd3S 009'02E14 'env 006'L4L'O is 'lnr Ad Wald eseuoul 16101 AO lNnOWV H161016 60/80 AA %1Z'601 E89'6801•14 %tL'86 (E6 CL50'ZQ) lunoun)pape(ad 000'000'5E1$ lunowV peloe(old 000'091'69tS %L0'L- %EL'8 L %SY l- %SY L' %O6'Ol- %ZZ'0 %4l'0- %01'6Z- %861- %Z9'£ %£D'EZ- %99'9 %99'9 %00'001 C99'00'3414 1V101 %E4'L 08E'098'01. 3Nnr %926 009'LLVEL AVW %ZO'L °DL'MOt 21dV %EEL ZZ61,94'01. 'WIN %WOl DOYL08'41 '83d %09'L D09'201'1.1 'NVr %LTA 469'9£Z'OL '030 %Sint 00L'969'4L 'AON %WC 0021Z6LL '100 %0L'8 LB£'DLL'Z1 'd3S %46'01 004'SS6'4L 'env %89'L 005'9LZ'LLS 'lnr Ad Wald WMWOul 1V101 AO 1NnOWtl H1NOW K 40/LO AA V anssen V (unseen • %W L %L8'BL- %Ss9t %SZ'0L %40'ZZ- %BZ'6 %89'6 %44'SZ- %L0'OE %LZ'6L %9L'E %Ent %£Z'S L %00'001 L08260'L9IS 14101 %0911 £69'1.92E1 3Nnr %E8'8 00E'EL8'£l AVW %Z9'9 000'904'01 1MV 9S49'L 999'968'LI 21V81 %L4'6 00 t'9LL'41 '83d %80'L 00E La' LL 'NVr 9642'6 BL0'499'4L '030 %S9'6 00fL9409L 'AON %1L'9 006'L£9'01 '130 1619'01 1L471,9'91 'd3S %E6'8 006'120'14 'OAV %69'9 004'919'01S 'lnr Ad Wald (se(mu1 1V101 AO 1NnOnV H1NOW % L0/90 AA V einseeW NOSRIVd11100 A1141NOW S1d130321 XVl S3lVS V 321nSV3W NOISSIWWOO NOI1V1aOdSNV211 A1Nf100 301SN3Al l• RCTC Sales Tax Digest Summary THIRD Quarter Collection of SECOND Quarter Sales Quarter 2, 2008 ATTACHMENT INTRODUCTION Every geographic region of California continues to experience declines in sales tax revenue during the year ended 2rd Quarter 2008. Major contractions in more than one economic sector has cooled the California economy to face the same headwinds of flat to negative growth in 2008, and to a lesser extent into the year 2009. The purpose of this summary is to provide Riverside Co RCTC with an overview of economic trends and pressures affecting the economy. The percent change in cash receipts over the prior year was (-2.0%) statewide, (-1.2%) in Northern California and (-2.6%) in Southern California. The period's cash receipts include tax from business activity during the period, payments for prior periods and other cash adjustments. When we adjust out non -period related payments, we determine the business activity performance for the period. Overall business activity declined for the year ended 2nd Quarter 2008 by (-3.4%) statewide, (-3.0%) in Northern California, and (-3.6%) in Southern California. KEY FACTORS Several key factors influenced the sales tax revenue during the year ended 2"d Quarter 2008. The following table outlines the major influences on sales tax. Economic Influences on Sales Tax Fuel Costs Housing Market Troubles Auto Sales General Retail • Increased sales tax from Service Stations. • Decreased revenue from Building Materials as building, remodeling and cash -out refinancing continue to decline. • Significantly decreased revenue from New Auto Sales. • Declining consumer spending. information prepared byMuniServices, LLC 61 1 ROTC REGIONAL PERFORMANCE Diversity in California's economy necessitates analyzing the state by regions. The following table looks at business activity by economic category and three largest segments. The number on the left represents the proportion of the whole region's sales tax. The number on the right is the percent change from the prior year. ECONOMIC CATEGORIES: General Retail 96 of Total 96 Ch. Analysis 29.0/-2.8 of year ended 2nd 29.2/-L3 Quarter 2008 28.7/-4.1 29.8/-3.8 29.1/-2.9 26.5/-4.8 30.3/-4.4 34.0/-4.9 Food Products 96 of Total 96 Chi 17..3/ 1.7 17.6/3.1 15.6/-LO 16.2/2.1 17.7/ 1.6 15.3/0.1 16.2/ L8 26.4/O.0 Construction 96 of Total 96 Ch. 9.9/-13.4 9.4/-8.2 12.6/-16.7 12.8/-18.6 8.8/-11.6 12.8/ 22.3 15.6/-16.6 10.5/-18.0 Transportation 96 of Total 96 Ch. 24.3/-4.6 20.8/-2.1 26.5/-7.8 26.1/-7.1 24.6/-4.0 28.6/-8.1 28.0/-6.9 20.5/-83 Business to Business 96 of Total 96 Ch. 18.3/-1.3 21.8/0.0 15.5/-4.5 14.3/2.1 18.5/-1.9 14.9/-L7 9.2/-4.0 7.4/6.3 Miscellaneous 96 of Total 96 Ch. / 2/-10 L2/ L8 L I/-I1.0 0.8/-7.7 L2/-0.5 1.8/-0.9 0.8/-4.2 1.3/35.6 Total 100.0 -3.4 100.0 -1.1 100.0 -6.6 100.0 52 wao -3.0 /00.0 -7.2 100.0 -6.3 Iwo Three Largest Economic Segments: Analysis of yea ended 2nd Quarter 2008 Largest Segment 96 of Total Ch Restaurants 11.7 1.1 Restaurants 12.1 2.9 Department Stores 11.5 -L7 Department Stores 14.6 -3.1 Restaurants 12.5 L2 Auto Sales - New 118 -16.4 Department Stores 14.1 -4.4 Restaurants 18.3 0.6 2nd Largest 96 of Total 96 Ch Department Stores 10.5 -1.8 Department Stores 9.6 -L3 Auto Sales - New !08 -15.2 Service Stations 9.9 /2.6 Auto Sales - New 102 -135 Service Stations 1L1 7.8 Service Stations 10.6 12.8 Departmen t Stores 10.8 -8.7 3rd Lai t 96 of Total 46 Ch Auto Sales - New 10.0 -14.2 Auto Sales - New 8.9 -12.5 Restaurants 9.6 -L7 Auto Sales - New 9.9 -19.1 Department Stores 1O.0 -L4 Department Stores 11.0 -3.3 BIdg.Matls- Retail 9.2 -15.6 Miscellaneo us Retail 10.2 -2.8 General Retail: Apparel Stores, Department Stores, Furniture/Appliances, Drug Stores, Recreation Products, Florist/Nursery, and Misc. Retail Food Products: Restaurants, Food Markets, Liquor Stores, and Food Processing Equipment Construction: Building Materials Wholesale and Building Materials Retail Transportation: Auto Parts/Repair, New Auto Sales, Used Auto Sales, Service Stations, and Misc. Vehicle Sales Business to Business: Office Equipment, Electronic Equipment, Business Services, Energy Sales, Chemical Products, Heavy Industry, Light Industry, and Leasing Miscellaneous: Health/Government, Miscellaneous Other, and Closed Account Adjustments Information prepared byMuniServices, LLC 62 2 RCTC PERFORMANCE REVIEW The following tables review the net cash receipts and the business activity performance for 2"d Quarter 2008. Net Cash Receipts Anal sis Local Collections Share of County Pool 0.0% Share of State Pool 0.0% SBE Net Collections Less: Amount Due County 0.0% Less: Cost of Administration Net 202008 Receipts Net 202007 Receipts Actual Percentage Change $35,493,852 0 0 35,493,852 .00 (407,400) 35,086,452 39,076,287 10.2% Business Activity Performance Analysis Local Collections Less: Payments for Prior Periods Preliminary 202008 Collections Projected 202008 Late Payments Projected 202008 Final Results Actual 202007 Results Projected Percentage Change $35,493,852 (2,829,427) 32,664,425 1,853,480 34,517,905 38,647,506 -10.7% HISTORICAL CASH COLLECTIONS ANALYSIS BY QUARTER S42,000 S40,000 S38,000 o. •Y xS36,000 Z S34,000 S32,000 S30,000 (in thousands of SI rl Pli 011^=111 11111111111 1111111111111 IQ2006 2Q2006 3Q2006 4Q2006 IQ2007 2Q2007 3Q2007 4Q2007 1Q2008 2Q2008 _Net Receipts --+-5006 Admit Pees Due S600 $500 S400 „ Y wY $300 u 6 S200 d SI00 SO Information prepared byMuniSeruices, LLC 63 3 RCTC TOP 25 SALES/USE TAX CONTRIBUTORS The following list identifies Riverside Co RCTC's Top 25 Sales/Use Tax contributors. The list is in alphabetical order and represents the year ended 2nd Quarter 2008. The Top 25 Sales/Use Tax contributors generate 21.7% of Riverside Co RCTC's total sales and use tax revenue. ARCO AWPM MINI MARTS BEST BUY STORES CHEVRON SERVICE STATIONS CIRCLE K FOOD STORES COSTCO WHOLESALE DEPT OF MOTOR VEHICLES HOME DEPOT J C PENNEY COMPANY JACK IN THE BOX RESTAURANTS JOHNSON MACHINERY COMPANY K MART STORES KOHL'S DEPARTMENT STORES LOWE'S HOME IMPROVEMENT MACY'S DEPARTMENT STORE MOBIL SERVICE STATIONS RALPH'S GROCERY COMPANY RITE AID DRUG STORES. ROBERTSONS READY MIX ROSS STORES SAM'S CLUB SEARS ROEBUCK & COMPANY SHELL SERVICE STATIONS STATER BROS MARKETS TARGET STORES WAL MART STORES HISTORICAL SALES TAX AMOUNTS The following chart shows the sales tax level for the year ended 2"d Quarter 2008 and the highs and the lows for each segment over the last two years. S25,000 $20,000 S15,000 $10,000 S5,000 (in thousands of $) M2Q2008 *High = Low SO °9 4 " O� S� cs g Po 4.9 °9e 1.1" '�� ce.' O $4,4 ,``fie 9 o -04 4-a� J t tt(, information prepared byMuniServices, LLC 64 4 RCTC ANNUAL SALES TAX BY BUSINESS CATEGORY 2Q 2008 IQ 2008 4Q 2007 3Q 2007 2Q 2007 IQ 2007 4Q 21106 3Q 2006 2Q 2006 IQ 2006 (in thousands of S) SO S20,000 $40,000 S60,000 S80,000 S100,000 5720,000 SI40,000 $160,000 $180,000 ®G eaeral 0 etail ®Food Prod acts ORITrausp urlal ion ®C onslruetio• 8l8 osisess T o e usisess RIM iscell FIVE-YEAR ECONOMIC TREND: Business To Business S7,000 S6,000 $5,000 $4,000 $3,000 S2,000 $1,000 SO (in thousands of S) nn11____ M11111111111111111 1111111111111111111 1111111111111111111 1111111111111.111111 1111111111 i-11111111 8 E y a � N N b g a 4u a 0 a g a g c N b g a g a e c N e a g a g a a N Information prepared byMuniSafwees, LLC 65 5 RCTC In QUARTER 2008 FINAL RESULTS • $34,256,580 Local net cash collections • 5-338,900 Less pool amounts • 53,162,365 Less prior quarter payments • $2,296,530 Add late payments • $33,729,644 Local net economic collections after adjustments • DOWN BY 12.5% compared to 1st Quarter 2007. MUNISERVICES" AUDIT RESULTS MuniServices, LLC performs an on -going audit for the District of Riverside Co RCTC. This quarter, Riverside Co RCTC received $140,825 in sales tax from MuniServices' audit efforts, bringing the total sates tax revenue produced by MuniServices to $140,825. • Information prepared byMuniServices, LLC 66 6 • • RCTC BENCHMARK YEAR 200802 COMPARED TO BENCHMARK YEAR 200702 MuniLLC ATTACHMENT 3 General Retail %of Total/%Change 28.7/-5.7 III ` it In 29.0/-2.8 ECONOMIC .t A' 29.2/-1.3 CATEGORY 28.7/ 4.1 ANALYSIS Ili 11_'r 29.8/-3.8 H 29.1/-2.9 26.5/-4.8 30.3/-4.4 34.0/-4.9 Food Products % of Total / % Chan • e 14.9/-0.8 17.3/1.7 17.6/3.1 15.6/-1.0 16.2/2.1 17.7/1.6 15.3/0.1 16.2/1.8 26.4/0.0 Construction %of Total/%Change 13.1/-23.4 9.9/-13.4 9.4/-8.2 12.6/-16.7 12.8/-18.6 8.8/-11.6 12.8/-22.3 15.6/-16.6 10.5/-18.0 Transportation of Total /% Change 26.3/-8.9 24.3/-4.6 .20.8/-2.1 26.5/-7.8 . 26.1 /-7.1 24.6/-4.0 28.6/-8.1 28.0/-6.9 20.5/-8.3 Business to Business % of Total/ % Chan. e 15.8/-7.0 18.3/-1.3 21.8/0.0 15.5/-4.5 14.3/2.1 18.5/-1.9 14.9/-1.7 9.2/-4.0 7.4/6.3 Miscellaneous %of Total/%Change 1.1/-8.6 1.2/-1.0 1.2/1.8 1.1/-11.0 0.8/-7.7 1.2/-0.5 1.8/-0.9 0.8/-4.2 1.3/35.6 Total 100.0 /-8.8 100.0 /-3.4 100.0 /-1.1 100.0 /-6.6 100.0 /-5.2 100.0 /-3.0 100.0 / -7.2 100.0 /-5.3 100.0 /-4.9 General Retail: Apparel Stores, Department Stores, Fumiture/Appliances, Drug Stores, Recreation Products, Florist/Nursery, and Misc. Retail Food Products: Restaurants, Food Markets, Liquor Stores, and Food Processing Equipment Construction: Building Materials Retail and Building Materials Wholesale Transportation: Auto Parts/Repair, Auto Sales - New, Auto Sales - Used, Service Stations, and Misc. Vehicle Sales Business to Business' Office Equip., Electronic Equip., Business Services, Energy Sales, Chemical Products, Heavy Industry, Light Industry, and Leasing Miscellaneous: Health & Govemment, Miscellaneous Other, and Closed Account Adjustments Largest Segment % of Total / % Change 2nd Largest Segment % of Total / % Change 3rd Largest Segment % of Total / % Change Department Stores 11.2/-2.4 Service Stations 10.6/9.0 Auto Sales - New 10.6 /-18.4 Restaurants 11.7 / 1.1 Department Stores 10.5/-1.8 Auto Sales New 10.0/-14.2 ECONOMIC SEGMENTS ANALYSIS Restaurant 12.1/2.9 Department Stores 9.6 /-1.3 Auto Sales New 8.9/-12.5 Department Stores 11.5 /-1.7 Auto Sales New 10.8/-15.2 Restaurants 9.6/-1.7 Department Stores 14.6/-3.1 Service Stations 9.9/12.6 Auto Sales New 9.9/-19.1 Restaurants 12.5 / 1.2 Auto Sales - New 10.2/-13.5 Department Stores 10.01-1.4 Auto Sales - New 11.8/-16.4 Service Stations 11.1 /7.8 Department Stores 11.0/-3.3 Department Stores 14.1 /-4.4 Services Stations 10.6 / 12.8 Bldg. Matls- Retail 9.2/-15.6 Restaurants 18.3/0.6 Department Stores 10.8 /-8.7 Misc. Retail 10.2/-2.8 67 800z `z I. aagwenoN uoisspwoo uoRepodsuaal Awnoo appengj NT ol. uoRquasaad a4epdn sanuanaxel salpS aaU3U SON uogeAsi6aa ap oA ■ d1S dw nl ■ !ewawuaeno6Jem isalowl ❑ ill ■ y aanseaw • %Lb y aanseew %9Z %6 Isamu' _ %L 1e11Jawwan06JeP1 %S %s dwni S981 uopeAspea ylS eloNeA sanuanaa 3101:1 800Z saiaanooaa xel saes ui 000` 1-171-$ • y aanseaW aoi 6upodayspAleue xel saes Apepenb pue saoinaas lu ne sapinoad saovues!unn alau Aq iupd anuanaa WW1 fire 1-11uoua OM! • speq Algiuow uo paaoiiuow sidiaoaa used Seal anuana.l aun GAB Saxel saes dri pue y aanseaW saanoS anuanaij 0±01:1 O LOz 1.0 116noaul aupep sioipaad iseoaaoi. olwouooa ivaoald — Jew( Ise! poped ewes of paaedwoo uaunn g00z uoien soup 6umpep uaaq anal sidiaoaa )(el saps ANTuoW — s!spo !pan `!ego16 ow! pan!ona sou 800Z Agee u! sppo !a!ouauu • uopafoad pasinaa anoge 41.46ils 80/LOOz Ad Ienpv — sanuanaa pala6pnq ui suoRonpaa ui pallnsaa suopafoad anuanaa xel saps aeak-piW — LOOZ aaqwaoaa Aci a!gpaoRou AWOUooa !gool uo sppo jo loedwi anwbeN . uol.onaisuoo pue saps oine uo 6uipuads aauansuoo pua 6uisnoq spew - LOOZ-p!w s!spo a6e6pow ewpdgns . Awouooa 6upo!s su6!s pemous L0/900Z Ad • spuaal xel saleS lUGOOEI Q2 2008 Sales Tax Report: Economic Categories • High growth regions in prior years related to housing experiencing high declines — Inland Empire has highest decline in sales taxes • Most significant declines in construction and transportation categories BENCHMARK YEAR 2008Q2 COMPARED TO BENCHMARK YEAR 2007Q2 ECONOMIC CATEGORY ANALYSIS 29.1 /-2.9 °* "..I° 30.3/-4.4 34.0/-4.9 General Retail % of Total / % Chan. e 28.7/-5.7 29.0/-2.8 29.2/-1.3 28.7/-4.1 29.8/-3.8 Food Products % of Total / % Chan•e 14.9/-0.8 17.3/1.7 17.6/3.1 15.6/-1.0 16.2/2.1 17.7/1.6 16.2/1.8 26.4/0.0 Construction % of Total / % Chan. a 13.1 /-23.4 9.9/-13.4 9.4/-8.2 12.6/-16.7 12.8/-18.6 8.8/-11.6 Y qR 15.6/-16.6 10.5/-18.0 Transportation % of Total / % Change 26.3/-8.9 24.3/-4.6 20.8/-2.1 26.5/-7.8 26.1 /-7.1 24.6/-4.0 ?' 28.0/-6.9 20.5/-8.3 Business to Business %of Total /%Chan.e 15.8/-7.0 18.3/-1.3 21.8/0.0 15.5/-4.5 14.3/2.1 18.5/-1.9 •; r, k r 9.2/-4.0 7.4/6.3 Miscellaneous % of Total / % Change f.l /-8.6 1.2/-1.0 1.2/ 1.8 1.1 /-11.0 0.8/-77 1.2/-0.5 , � �r� 1 0.8/-4.2 1.3/35.6 Total 100.0/-8.8 100.0/-3.4 100.0/-1.1 100.0/-6.6 100.0/-5.2 100.0/-3.0 !d a ;.4 100.0/-6.3 100.0/-4.9 General Retail: Apparel Stores, Department Stores, Furniture/Appliances, Drug Stores, Recreation Products, Florist/Nursery, and Misc. Retail Food Products: Restaurants, Food Markets, Liquor Stores, and Food Processing Equipment Construction: Building Materials Retail and Building Materials Wholesale Transportation: Auto Parts/Repair, Auto Sales - New, Auto Sales - Used, Service Stations, and Misc. Vehicle Sales Business to Business: Office Equip., Electronic Equip., Business Services, Energy Sales, Chemical Products, Heavy Industry, Light Industry, and Leasing Miscellaneous: Health & Government, Miscellaneous Other, and Closed Account Adjustments Q2 2008 Sales Tax Report: Economic Segments • Largest economic segments in Inland Empire — Department stores and new auto sales continue to decline — Service stations increased due to higher fuel prices • Sales tax levels for last two-year period — Service stations at high point in Q2 2008 — New auto sales, wholesale and retail building materials, misc retail, and light industry at low point in Q2 2008 BENCHMARK YEAR 2008Q2 COMPARED TO BENCHMARK YEAR 2007Q2 Largest Segment %of Total /%Chan•e Department Stores 11.2/-2.4 Restaurants 11.7/1.1 ECONOMIC Restaurant 12.1/2.9 SEGMENTS Department Stores 11.5/-1.7 ANALYSIS Department Stores 14.6/-3.1 Restaurants 12.5/1.2 F, i r; rig r , ems'' Department ; Stores 14.1/-4.4 Restaurants 18.3/0.6 2nd Largest Segment %of Total/ % Chan.e Service Stations 10.6/9.0 Department Stores 10.5/-1.8 Department Stores 9.6/-1.3 Auto Sales New 10.8/-15.2 Service Stations 9.9/12.6 Auto Sales New 10.2/-13.5 tz . .� 1r-'.' Services Stations 10.6/12.8 Department Stores 10.8/-8.7 3rd Largest Segment % of Total/ %Charlie Auto Sales - New 10.6/-18.4 Auto Sales New 10.0/-14.2 Auto Sales New 8.9/-12.5 Restaurants 9.6/-1.7 Auto Sales New 9.9/-19.1 Department Stores 10.0/-1.4 s P+€ga tx.°,',s Bldg. Matls- g Retail 9.2/-15.6 Misc. Retail 10.2/-2.8 lenlov pape[cud �o��o�\�or�oo� \� 0oo � 0$ 000 `000 `oZ$ 000 `000 `ot$ 000 `000 `09$ 000 `000 `09$ 000`000`00 l$ - 000 `000 `0Z l $ 000`000`017l$ 000 `000 `09 l $ 000 `000 `09 l $ dams wu uo!Inw 9 Ztb l$ sanuanaa lenlod — uollll1 1'917l$10 sidpow len10y — uounw 5E 1.$ uoill w (1.E$) wewlsnfpe anuanaa aeaA-plug 80/LOOz Ad • uonnw 91791$ jo sanuanaa len101/ — uonnw L'LS l$ si.dpoaa lenloy — m111 1 65 L$ jo uoi e[wd L0/90C2 Ad • saxel saes v aanseaW Ienloy pa1oafoad dl-1 os 000`000`o L$ 000`000`oz$ 000`000`os$ 0o0`0o0`o-b$ 0o0`000`o5$ oo0`000`o9$ 00o`oo0`OL$ 000`000`08$ uo!II!w 8'69$ sanuanaa — uo!II!w 6'OL$ slcipoaa !enjoy - uoi��lua L9$ uoi ip (G to luemsnfpe anuenaa aeaA-p w 80/LOOz Ad uo!II41 rtz$ sanuanaa !enjoy — uo!II!w 8' bL$ slcIpoaa !en}oy — uonw 5L$ Jo uopefa d L0/9003 Ad saxel saleS d_L-1 • • 6upoiiuow panupoo • saxel saps uo pedw! Awouooa pool of uoprewioiui aa��aq apinoad wogs 800Z aaqu�apaa Onoaul sldlaoal — 6002 Agee anp suopafoad 01/600Z Ad pue suoperoad ieseA-NAI • mai( lsel poped awes /mpg %8.6 am anuow anol sidiaaaH . WHIP L9$— a�a�( aopd ui poped ewes mow' %p' l l aaB 8003 aagopo Ononn sidiaaatj . uoupw 9E 1$ .d amseeN — sanuanaa palabpnq 60/8002 Ad • • RIVERS/DE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION COMM/SS/ON DATE: November 12, 2008 TO: Riverside County Transportation Commission FROM: Cathy Bechtel, Project Development Director THROUGH: Anne Mayer, Executive Director SUBJECT: Public Hearing on the Mid County Parkway Draft Environmental Impact Report/Draft Environmental Impact Statement STAFF RECOMMENDATION: This item is for the Commission to receive public comments on the Mid County Parkway (MCP) draft environmental impact report/draft environmental impact statement (DEIR/DEIS). SUMMARY: The DEIR/DEIS for the proposed MCP project is now ready for review. The document examines the Mid County Parkway's environmental impacts including air quality; biological resources such as plant life, wildlife and its habitat; community impacts such as existing land uses, housing, employment and population conditions; cultural resources; floodplains; geology and soils; hazardous waste sites; noise; public services and utilities; parks, recreation areas, wildlife and waterfowl refuges; local traffic conditions; the visual character of the project area; and water resources. It describes the alternatives for the project, the impacts from each of the alternatives, and the proposed avoidance, minimization and/or mitigation measures for each of these impacts. In compliance with both the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) and the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA), the results of the various engineering and environmental studies for the MCP project are documented in a DEIR/DEIS that is circulated for review and comment to the general public and public agencies. While a minimum review and comment period of 45 days is required under CEQA and NEPA, given the project scope and the amount of documentation in the DEIR/DEIS, the Commission and the Federal Highway Administration (FHWA) agreed to extend the circulation period to a 60-day review period, which runs from October 10 through December 8, 2008. In addition, two public hearings will be conducted to provide the public with an opportunity to attend, participate, and comment in person. Action from the Commission will not be requested on November 12, 2008. All comments received during the public review period, both written and oral, will become part of the public record and will be compiled and Agenda Item 10 68 responded to as part of the final environmental impact report/final environmental impact statement (FEIR/FEIS). The Commission will be requested to act on project approval and final alternative selection upon completion of the FEIR/FEIS, projected for Summer 2009. BACKGROUND INFORMATION: The MCP project was identified as a key west -east, regional transportation corridor as a result of several years of comprehensive land use and transportation planning in Riverside County through the Riverside County Integrated Project (RCIP). The purpose of the RCIP was to address the planning, environmental, and transportation issues that would result from the projected doubling of population in Riverside County, from 1.5 million residents currently to approximately 3.0 million by 2020. The RCIP consisted of three components: 1) a new General Plan for Riverside County, adopted in October 2003; 2) a Multiple Species Habitat Conservation Plan (MSHCP) for Western Riverside County (approved in June 2004); and 3) the Community and Environmental Transportation Acceptability Process (CETAP) to identify both intra-county and inter -county transportation corridors needed to support the projected population growth. The RCIP was undertaken as a way to facilitate construction of infrastructure improvements while incorporating quality of life issues of the residents of Riverside County that included the preservation of open space and conservation of the region's unique environment. In 1999, the Commission, in its role as the transportation planning agency for the county, was charged with identifying the location for multimodal transportation facilities that would meet the needs of the General Plan and MSHCP while accommodating the future increases in travel demand. It was through the CETAP process that four priority corridors were identified: a Riverside County to Orange County corridor, a Moreno Valley to San Bernardino County corridor, a Winchester to Temecula corridor, and a Hemet to Corona/Lake Elsinore (HCLE) corridor. The proposed MCP project was developed as a result of the HCLE corridor studies. At its June 2003 meeting, the Commission approved initiation of a project -level environmental document for a west -east corridor now known as the MCP project. All studies and documents were completed in cooperation with participating local, state and federal agencies under a partnership agreement for environmental stewardship resulting from recognition of the county's innovative planning effort to integrate land use, environmental conservation, and transportation needs. CETAP was one of seven projects in the nation that received federal recognition for environmental streamlining under Executive Order 13274 from the White House. Agenda Item 10 • 69 • In January 2004, the project's official purpose and need statement was approved by FHWA, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (USEPA) and U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (USACE). Staff proceeded with the development of preliminary project alternatives with public involvement and input received via three public meetings and through extensive agency stakeholder coordination. The range of alternatives were intended to meet the requirements for alternatives analysis under CEQA, NEPA, Section 404 of the federal Clean Water Act (CWA), and Section 4(f) of the Department of Transportation Act (49 USC 303). Build Alternatives were developed through this collaborative process in accordance with the NEPA/404 integration process. These alignment alternatives were approved for study by the FHWA, USEPA and USACE in November 2004, allowing for the commencement of detailed environmental technical studies required for inclusion in the environmental document. Subsequent to this authorization, a revised suite of alternatives was developed to address the elimination of alternatives deemed impracticable due to potential impacts to the Lake Mathews and Lake Perris dams, and the addition of a new alternative (Alternative 9) that fully avoided the Metropolitan Water District (MWD) MSHCP reserve land. The revised suite of alternatives, including no Build Alternatives 1 A and 1 B, and Build Alternatives 4, 5, 6, 7, and 9, were approved for study by the FHWA, USEPA, and USACE in November -December 2005. Following completion of the draft technical studies in 2007, the FHWA, USEPA, and USACE concurred that this same suite of alternatives be included in the DEIR/DEIS that would be circulated for public review. After comparing and weighing the benefits and impacts of each of the feasible alternatives, at its September 12, 2007 meeting, the Commission approved identification of Alternative 9 Temescal Wash Design Variation (TWS DV) as the locally preferred alternative in the DEIR/DEIS. Technical studies completed for the project demonstrated that Alternative 9 TWS DV was the least environmentally damaging practicable alternative to both the natural and human environments. Since the Commission's action in September 2007, staff has continued to work closely with Caltrans, FHWA, and the resource agency partners to prepare the DEIR/DEIS for public review. Approval to circulate the document for public review was received from FHWA on October 2, 2008. Following distribution of the DEIR/DEIS to public agencies, interested parties, and various public viewing locations, a 60-day public review period began on October 10, 2008. Public Outreach Efforts The Commission public outreach efforts on the MCP project span back to the initiation of the CETAP process as part of the RCIP. In FY 2000/01, seven public meetings were held with a focus on countywide transportation issues, in addition Agenda Item 10 70 to the 21 public meetings that were held as part of the larger RCIP process. Periodically, a project newsletter was provided to interested parties with relevant, up to date project information. A project website was developed to complement the newsletter and provide the public with an ongoing, interactive means to participate in the development of the MCP Project. In December 2004, the Commission conducted three scoping meetings seeking public and stakeholder input on the preliminary alternative alignments and environmental issues to be addressed in the MCP's environmental document. In August 2005, the Commission conducted another public meeting to seek input on refinements to the project alternative alignments that resulted from concerns that two of the alternatives were impracticable due to potential impacts to the Lake Mathews and Lake Perris dams, and the addition of a new Alternative 9 that fully avoided MWD's MSHCP reserve land. In September 2007, after the Commission approved staff's recommendation to identify Alternative 9 TWS DV as the locally preferred alternative, the Commission distributed to the public <a newsletter with information on the identification of the locally preferred alternative. Once the DEIR/DEIS was completed and approval to circulate received, the Commission announced the availability of the document for public review and the planned public information meetings and public hearings in the Federal Register and area newspapers. The draft document is available for review at ten public locations including: the Commission, Ca!trans District 8, FHWA (Sacramento), city of Corona Public Works, and public libraries in the cities of Corona Hemet, Moreno Valley, Perris, San Jacinto, and Woodcrest. The document can also be viewed on-line at the project website at www.midcountyparkway.org. Additionally, a newsletter was prepared and mailed to all residents, property owners, and businesses within a 300-foot radius of the alternatives informing them of the various meetings, opportunity for comment, and availability of the document for viewing. Interested parties were also notified of this information via email. Commission staff has also provided presentations to different stakeholders and local chambers of commerce since the start of the public circulation period. The Commission conducted three public information meetings in conjunction with the release of the DEIR/DEIS for public review and comment. These open house style public meetings were held in the cities of Corona, Perris, and San Jacinto. Each of these meetings occurred the last week in October of 2008. In addition, the Commission conducted a public hearing in the city of Perris on November 6, 2008 to afford the public the opportunity to participate in the public hearing process if the public could not attend the hearing scheduled to be conducted before the Commission on November 12, 2008. Agenda Item 10 • 71 • Next Steps Upon closure of the public comment period on December 8, 2008, all comments received from the public and agency stakeholders will be compiled, evaluated, and responses developed for incorporation into the FEIR/FEIS. Staff anticipates the preparation of the FEIR/FEIS to take several months. The approval of the FEIR/FEIS will follow separate processes under CEQA and NEPA. Under CEQA, the FEIR (including responses to comments) will be presented to the Commission for review; staff anticipates this happening in Summer 2009. At that time, the Commission will need to consider two actions. The first action will be to certify the FEIR and the second action will be to approve the project. Upon completion of these actions by the Commission, FHWA will make the FEIS available for a 30-day public review period. Upon completion of this final review, the FHWA will prepare and approve a Record of Decision (ROD) completing the NEPA process. Once the ROD is obtained, initiation of the next phase of project development may commence including right-of-way acquisition/protection and final design. Movement to the next phase will require action by the Commission. Attachment: MCP Map Agenda Item 10 72 • £L • A 1V1NIIVa Jl1Nnop CIfvJ SI3/}:II3 11aaa a016upeeH Aenoped Alunoo pm' lueu woo Imo oHcind a01. LI Zpue 149 noN - s6upeeH . u 8 0aa 01 LBO I TOO - poped luewwoo opgnd . 1410 100 nnainaa oilgnd a01 pesealaa - SI3/H13 Tula — salpnuS Ieluewuoainu3 . 1.3 sdegAA pue nnoN leuM • anRewaTIV Pa Inlaid id A11eooi • SI3/1:I13 TIEJa s6ulpug itieWLIBIS • sanReweilb jo Aprils pue luewdolanaa • mdu l 3Ilgnd • Aenn ped Alunoo pm' • d01/11 pue d10E1 AJois!H • ;papaau s! AuM pue dam s! legm • 011d AVM ad AIM-10D o IIw eaay ApmS •sawunwwoo Alunoo appenlH 6uipunauns pue `seam euoaoo pue swed `oluloep ues auk ui uoRsabuoo leuoi6aa pue Fool map.' paublsap aopwoo uoReTiodsuaal al!w zE V z ifeh ed Alunoa PIN mil s! leLI I 0 d. AV d AlNrt0 aIW 03 13 imorlD wewAoldw3 pue uogeindod O2 d AVAANNVd AINCIOD 011/1/ 0 000'009 0001000' 000#00g' 0001000'Z 000100§'Z 00010001C 000/00g#C OCE'b5 iv; 0008 Koz ampau pus uogsa6uo3 analla}i 3(021d AVd A1N(lOD 01W saopiaaoa uoptaodsuan mau - db'130• sane 000`691. aalnbadisalaads g� pelad uoRenaasuoa iaiigaH - dOHSW• anni lupdan19 — uald laaauao. :(queweie pop° esagi eleAew! polo pupa e to isiu) weib ad pad-aaaul i dl3bh” joefaid pajeZeju/ itiunoa apiweAW saoppaaoa yfjpopd anon meuaq uoRepodsuen isaleaa6 auk papina d eaae Apnis auk ped aui. ui sanReuaaije pemous 6uNepon. seuw +0Z 1. payaniena sanileuieije bs 000 passedwooua ewe APINS. (370H) aop uo0 exe-yeuwoo o) JatuaH 101Id ANIIOD Claw Aenoped Alunoo pm] a01 saipnis pluewuoainua lane! Tpafaxl peis auk sanoadde o1ol1 `s6uipui. Apnis dd130 uo paseq `COO` I aunt . aseud (:13/Vd) luaumooa 1ejuacuu04nu3 pua joafoid Aeno ed ifjunoa p�W ccaggnd aut o spaau Ale pue Aijipow 6upsaappe-aligm luewuaoue uewnu pug aut o InIpuiva aae OAA leg]. 6uReilsuowea„ diyspa Mays leluewuwinu3 „UOpaload leitle auoainua 6uis wa dwod inowm Aienuep pefoad enoadwi„ &uju gueaals leluecuuaunu3 Bud uleaais iejuacuuo.gnu3 ,rod tint aapap aminoax3 asnoy anijM aapun uomuBoow /euolleu sanIaoar dV130 Jiro d A4/1VANaVd Al N CI OD CI W don uo sbunzew ongnd 0G • dO`W 01 sn ap!n6 padleg 1-10!uM uo lelaodsuaal uo AIleowoads 6u!snool sbuReaw o!Ignd Jen° • uoRedp!laed Aouabe pue d!lgnd o saeaiC 6 aano `800z 01666 Lwaid • Aenoped Alruno0 p! W pue `cIV130 `d I0EI S 13/813 - saipnls leaiuuaal - - 8003 019003 sluawubuy Jo has to luauaauilabi - saipnis spAieud amen suanteo - - 9003 01.17003 swewu6nv ani.euaally 10 has AJeup!laad - luawaiels paaN pue asodand - luauaaaa6y d usaauved Aoua6d - -17003 01 C003 • • • seAnewelid jo ifpnis pus Juacudo/anap indui JefijOLIGNMS / allgnd MID COUNTY PARK AY PROJECT Alternatives studied in the DEIR/DEIST • No Build Alternatives: — Alternative 1 A — No Project/No Action --- Existing Ground Conditions — Alternative-1 B — No Project/No Action General Plan Circulation Element Conditions DMO21d AdM)121bd A1NClOJ 01W d AV GARBLUGMV dd AINflO) CEW iens!n juoRepodsuea1 seRffilrl pue saainaas ougncl uo eaaoa8 pue s)iaed as!oN aisem snop ezeH silos pue Mope° uoRenienD updpoold saaa noseH spedwi Aijunwwoo sea mosalj leaOolon Aijieno aiy aprtloul saipms ails penes E spiony. spuel anaasaa 6uRsixa pue `puelwiel o spedw! lsannad. suoReindod Aipou wiewodui MOO 011.0EdW! pap keel. doHSW aMW spione Alalaidwoo upgm anReuieue Apo. saioads pue saoanosa i aalem 6u0ewup iseai (89L'6$ o 81. 6$ snsaan 886'z$) lsoo isemole swauaaduidsip ssauisnq pue leRuapisaa aagwnu GAneLLIene' pa majaad Ajlaoo/ se 6 alige enV sell fluapi 0101:1-Z00Z `L L gin FL noN uo 6upeeH oilgnd puooas SI3/EII3 uo oilgnd woaj ALIOLLI sal anr809a o 6upeeH oilgnd �u6iuo1 • oluper ues Loos loo - siaaad ul6z �00 - euoaoo u„.8Z 100 - :plau s6uReen uo eauolul oilgnd aaaul u18 oaa sasolo pue u}p Too pauado poped pue nnainaa Aoua6y pue oilgnd Aep o9 • • • (600z aagweoaa) uoppea paooalj e anoadde pue aaedaad o1 Z polaad nnalna l oggnd Aup of pue dMHd Aq sl3_Ieuu jo asealabl • :uoRoe aappuoo b'MHd - bd3N. (600z iiedpau.,u,ns) Toafaid auk ana dde 01 z bI I3 Ieu!d au141.10o o1 uoRoe aappuoo saauops witioo oiold - do30• 474i :sclais lewd axeu jeqm 4mou Jew eullauqi ifemved Ajunoa 1111101grifta....'' 0 d AVM)111Vd AINflOD 01W • e pamelA 6a o • itsnnia e dlo(lu poop i ua • nnnnnn o lgnd Tsampoom A.ieJgn o!Ignd oluper ues o!Ignd spied ollgnd AelleA ouaaoW o!Ignd lauaaH AieJc !i o!Ignd euomo suoaoo jo(�!� ` AAHd • g susalleo 010H Sl3/1:113 JJeJ0 aq ueu euo•AenopeclAiunoop!ua•mm n 80L17-171536 VO `oluauaeapes 00 L-17 al!nS `IIeW loilde0 099 uoRags!uppy APARi6lH papal ' wea Ae1 8033-30536 VO `ap! eAD21 80031. X08 ' O' d 010b1 lalu099 A1-1120 :oj juas aq ueo sluacucuo0 ualjpm ua dolt AsMD/asd a si leLIM �a 1J3(421d AVAAN 1Vd A1NflOJ ❑IW DATE: I I l 15/02 DETACH AND SUBMIT TO THE CLERK OF THE BOARD CHECK IF SUBJECT OF C p PUBLIC COMMENTS: PUBLIC COMMENTS: AGENDA ITEM NO.: (AS LISTED ON THE AGENDA! SUBJECT OF AGENDA ITEM: NAME: Lori W o c G e,c-/K PHONE NO.: gq(SS ADDRESS: I U 6 g I noLK PGL ric- "R I v e f S I c`i_ `1 Z S d 7 CITY ZIP CODE STREET REPRESENTING: PHONE NO.: NAME OF AGENCY / ORGANIZATION / GROUP BUSINESS ADDRESS: STREET O I WISH TO YIELD MY TIME TO: CITY ZIP CODE NAME OF INDIVIDUAL ' DATE: 1 / wogETACH AND SUBMIT TO THE CLERK OF THE BOARD CHECK IF PUBLIC COMMENTS: O AGENDA ITEM NO.: (AS LISTED ON THE AGENDA) NAME: ADDRESS: SUBJECT OF PUBLIC COMMENTS: SUBJECT OF AGENDA ITEM: TVA N vek soIPofq- A LT REKONor .1ottt\1 Rots PHONE NO.: 40 4 ( R,4/4 N D. UI3TA MR4R 15 92 o STREET CITY ZIP 0 E REPRESENTING: NAME OF AGENCY / ORGANIZATION / GROUP BUSINESS ADDRESS: PHONE NO.: STREET O I WISH TO YIELD MY TIME TO: CITY NAME OF INDIVIDUAL ZIP CODE w DETACH AND SUBMIT TO THE CLERK OF THE BOARD / DATE: upVel'►A130,/ lam/ ).ong CHECK IF SUBJECT OF PUBLIC COMMENTS: PUBLIC COMMENTS: SIJ p�r� �L el is L ✓ 5co AGENDA ITEM NO.: t O SUBJECT OF r `L (AS LISTED ON THE AGENDA) AGENDA ITEM: (� CgU✓T1 `/ PC (.//10.4.)4 1 NAME: L4.)1 , 11 C. ✓lA /1/1 U r v G/ PHONE NO.: ADDRESS: a S/ S 5ISr v/O✓CZbdif[.erf,�S CA �acS—dSTREET '�M j r• v-�/ wt� eV C 4 I Knit, I = �1-c ICI P ZIP CODE REPRESENTING)x!T Cl -4W k)ii4e..,kezS' Nvi4ic y -44"j bv,ISHONE NO.: 7 6/, 3 / 3,.7774.Z AME OF AGENCY / ORGANIZATION ./ GROUP BUSINESS ADDRESS:-�/v1a, Mvv`rc,�Cdv✓�nleve,(, IP�C>,OD. STREET CITY ZIP CODE O I WISH TO YIELD MY TIME TO: NAME OF INDIVIDUAL DETACH AND SUBMIT TO THE CLERK OF THE BOARD DATE: /"/2/ f - CHECK IF SUBJECT OF PUBLIC COMMENTS: O PUBLIC COMMENTS: AGENDA ITEM NO.: 1/1 (AS LISTED ON THE AGENDA) 0". SUBJECT OF AGENDA ITEM: /11:1' iva,h6e/47 NAME: _25,441 f r iVe."-' PHONE NO.: ADDRESS: P2,24/,�" \r�4 PA, %zti V �Z Ze, ,fin/,G�e, -I1-72 % STREET CITY` � ZIP CODE REPRESENTING: 4�y��; �� ��t. PHONE NO.:Z/� S� 2- 7�a NAME & AGENCY ! ORGANIZATION ! GROu� BUSINESS ADDRESS: ,fk' 411vL STREET CITY ZIP CODE O I WISH TO YIELD MY TIME TO: NAME OF INDIVIDUAL 4u¢4-( /-�ji'i C e: %l 4-'1' - 14..4'v�� �% ‘.ti O/D/WY > 74.0 s i s.C-74)-4- DATE: ijh 7-16 r CHECK IF SUBJECT OF PUBLIC COMMENTS: Ij1 PUBLIC COMMENTS: "iJ )1.7 rat k h A7 AGENDA ITEM NO.: SUBJECT OF (AS LISTED ON AGENDA) / AGENDA ITEM: / `'% 4 �w /Jett F a. 4^. DETACH AND SUBMIT TO THE CLERK OF THE BOARD NAME: I 0 41 J� C a 6J m PHONE NO.: rfie ‘i't- 7rpZ ADDRESS: 3 C57) .SGv� 44. Te, J t,,jr f t s-# 7 STREET ZIP CODE REPRESENTING: NAME ONAGENCY / ORGANIZATION / GROUP BUSINESS ADDRESS: STREET �tlr�rft CITY PHONE NO.: O I WISH TO YIELD MY TIME TO: CITY ZIP CODE NAME OF INDIVIDUAL DATE: DETACH AND SUBMIT TO THE CLERK OF THE BOARD 1If12lb CHECK IF PUBLIC COMMENTS: SUBJECT OF PUBLIC COMMENTS: jV11 Counly PAeL vvity AGENDA ITEM NO.: SUBJECT OF (AS LISTED ON THE AGENDA) (� AGENDA ITEM: M, A coLinty NAME: MI 01-Al- k Wei ci 411 °t PHONE NO.: (6jsis) E g; •-] I °D ADDRESS: 85 Vriv'e(s ity - / 2rSde- Ch ` Ls D STREET / CITY ZIP CODE REPRESENTING: Cd fi-r- -4 6-(s'I ci-e CL,ovive' e PHONE NO.: NAME OF AGENCY / ORGANIZATION / GROUP BUSINESS ADDRESS: STREET O I WISH TO YIELD MY TIME TO: CITY ZIP CODE NAME OF INDIVIDUAL REPRESENTING: NAME OF AGENCY / ORGANIZATION / GROUP BUSINESS ADDRESS: DATE: DETACH AND SUBMIT TO THE CLERK OF THE BOARD /2,/ZDD '8 CHECK IF SUBJECT OF PUBLIC COMMENTS: O PUBLIC COMMENTS: AGENDA ITEM NO.: % SUBJECT OF IAS LISTED ON THE AGENDA) a AGENDA ITEM: /l/() NAME: --;" /*.I.-C.1 //17/-7-7914S C11v ADDRESS: ` 707.`7 ��/L Zf //= I� G/=c-t� %1�J— Sc�°.3 P/ =/7/Z / 5 STREET CITY ZIP CODS, zbZ s 7LD PHONE NO.: -8, {S(3g PHONE NO.: STREET O I WISH TO YIELD MY TIME TO: CITY ZIP CODE NAME OF INDIVIDUAL DATE: ////2/08 DETACH AND SUBMIT TO THE CLERK OF THE BOARD CHECK IF SUBJECT OF � PUBLIC COMMENTS: � PUBLIC COMMENTS: /14%4" rduL y Edo Ausy AGENDA ITEM NO.: i SUBJECT OF // (AS LISTED ON THE AGENDA) AGENDA ITEM: Ake - (o4 ir1do4ct,a NAME: Pnti(/ r IdotAkki ADDRESS: fz5 )4/es/ Rcly.r4.1/ 4001 STREET PHONE NO.: fe*-Se/'6°g/ Ssc+ /3"/,/tir,.1/...- yZf%dS- CITY ZIP CODE REPRESENTING: e40/414, 1/44 114 $Bu 4� PHONE NO.: NAME OF AGENCY / OkGANIZATION / GROUP BUSINESS ADDRESS: Po Bar !19723 /5,4 C92-V Z 3 STREET CITY O I WISH TO YIELD MY TIME TO: NAME OF INDIVIDUAL ZIP CODE DATE: #-/?j -•Qh CHECK IF SUBJECT OF PUBLIC COMMENTS: O PUBLIC COMMENTS: AGENDA ITEM NO.: SUBJECT OF (AS LISTED ON THE AGENDA) /C., AGENDA ITEM: A NAME: I/ Lh2"1/¢j t 140 l 51e' PHONE NO.: 4}S/ 21 5 lid ADDRESS: 20692 e--7P//e 75".e- Z:x.. -"CITY y STREET �.0 Q ZIP CODE REPRESENTING: DETACH AND SUBMIT TO THE CLERK OF THE BOARD NAME OF AGENCY / ORGANIZATION / GROUP BUSINESS ADDRESS: STREET PHONE NO.: O I WISH TO YIELD MY TIME TO: CITY ZIP CODE NAME OF INDIVIDUAL DETACH AND SUBMIT TO THE CLERK OF THE BOARD DATE: ////02� CHECK IF SUBJECT OF PUBLIC COMMENTS: O PUBLIC COMMENTS: %Y%7.0 C ("A/ T rf 4¢,e/ell-d 4 v AGENDA ITEM NO.: IAS LISTED ON THE AGENDA) SUBJECT OF AGENDA ITEM: NAME: t,,56.V//I 6.4/C' ETQ ADDRESS: tab eits �Somma 4e STREET PHONE NO.: (762) 78?-� 7sp 907.5-76 CITY ZIP CODE REPRESENTING: vi2E.L/65 , "4/e/P� Ta �6'/207/ te)PHONE NO.: �J,`/),,2„„1��-� NAME OF AGENCY / ORGANIZATION / GROUP BUSINESS ADDRESS: STREET O I WISH TO YIELD MY TIME TO: CITY ZIP CODE NAME OF INDIVIDUAL `�/ , 2DEjACH AND SUBMIT TO THE CLERK OF THE BOARD DATE: / - D�'j CHECK IF SUBJECT OF �J PUBLIC COMMENTS: O PUBLIC COMMENTS:?/� C�d� ! /-4,2�+CU AGENDA ITEM NO.: (AS LISTED ON THf,AGENDA) NAME: 7/- SUBJECT OF AGENDA ITiEM: ADDRESS: /,ram/ c- TREET REPRESENTING: PHONE NO.: /y� ���- �570 CITY ZIP CODE jj�� PHONE NO.: `�V- W NAME OF AGENCY / ORGANIZATION / GROUP BUSINESS ADDRESS: STREET ❑ I WISH TO YIELD MY TIME TO: CITY NAME OF INDIVIDUAL ZIP CODE ADDRESS: DATE: DETACH AND SUBMIT TO THE CLERK OF THE BOARD �f- /a - o 0 CHECK IF SUBJECT OF PUBLIC COMMENTS: pl PUBLIC COMMENTS: X/fiB'7'sr Q f tJtiP 47/ aS q AGENDA ITEM NO.: SUBJECT OF (AS LISTED ON THE AGENDA) 474 AGENDA ITEM: rvC Ca3 rrr'G Pot r+ NAME: ,F;/( /6.)4,_ c-- PHONE NO.: ?6'teD /5-,Q © GAP 7-e-,>' s STREET REPRESENTING: NAME OF AGENCY / ORGANIZATION / GROUP BUSINESS ADDRESS: ��*rP (em Cm STREET CITY O I WISH TO YIELD MY TIME TO: PHONE NO,: ZIP CODE NAME OF INDIVIDUAL ZIP CODE DETACH AND SUBMIT TO THE CLERK OF THE BOARD DATE: I( i Lttl CHECK IF SUBJECT OF PUBLIC COMMENTS: 'yA PUBLIC COMMENTS: 12r if Lc) e►u4 ,f4/(4efj AGENDA ITEM NO.: I l7 SUBJECT OF (AS LISTED ON THE AGENDA) AGENDA ITEM: 'bra- f % � 7` n NAME: - i-- Q,V .tI" C 0 tAto C 1l f ✓ PHONE NO.: %li f—LJ V— ) 5I5" ADDRESS: (-13 S r (ivicvi/W (,rif✓-‘ J/eA STREET REPRESENTING: STLLL CITY ZIP CODE NAME OF AGENCY / ORGANIZATION / GROUP BUSINESS ADDRESS: STREET PHONE NO.: O I WISH TO YIELD MY TIME TO: CITY ZIP CODE NAME OF INDIVIDUAL DATE: YO f DETACH AND SUBMIT TO THE CLERK OF THE BOARD CHECK IF PUBLIC COMMENTS: O AGENDA ITEM NO.: AS LISTED ON THE AGENDA) NAME: ADDRESS: SUBJECT OF PUBLIC COMMENTS: SUBJECT OF AGENDA ITEM: SH A- t -C e,14 ?1-1,PL STREET REPRESENTING: w Y JY7 r c� C a d-1-7. jok W y 2‘ti CITY NAME OF AGENCY / ORGANIZATION / GROUP BUSINESS ADDRESS: STREET PHONE NO.: 9-S-I r 7761 9 Ir7� ZIP CODE PHONE NO.: O I WISH TO YIELD MY TIME TO: CITY NAME OF INDIVIDUAL ZIP CODE DETACH AND SUBMIT TO THE CLERK OF THE BOARD DATE: 1( _ kI _ 0 CHECK IF SUBJECT OF PUBLIC COMMENTS: Al PUBLIC COMMENTS: C ( (0./0-1 t "D�pi /E(, C AGENDA ITEM NO.: v " C (AS LISTED ON THE AGENDA) SUBJECT OF AGENDA ITEM: NAME: :3-i- wk ADDRESS: REPRESENTING: ?,0 CITY NAME OF AGENCY / ORGANIZATION / GROUP BUSINESS ADDRESS: STREET PHONE NO.: (61-iet)-Wq6 diS PHONE NO.: "i -S") O ZIP CODE O I WISH TO YIELD MY TIME TO: CITY ZIP CODE NAME OF INDIVIDUAL yr 1 N.,,, ,., SUBMIT TO THE CLERK OF THE BOARD DATE: GUUU / 6r( CHECK IF SUBJECT OF � PUBLIC COMMENTS: PUBLIC COMMENTS: ' 4 7V/C460?5USN /w V AGENDA ITEM NO.: `'e ��('(' / SUBJECT OF J (AS LISTED ON THE AGENDA) �A/' e 1/ AGENDA ITEM: �vC/e)/// NAME: / Oldiarial -Si �OSe1R �te1 PHONE NO.: LS-g - oz. S 57 ADDRESS: /‘ej0 , f%V'l4.�`.to 4jCQ /�P.NIS' � I O� `✓ V STREET (cry ZIP CODE REPRESENTING: NAME OF AGENCY / ORGANIZATION / GROUP BUSINESS ADDRESS: STREET PHONE NO.: O I WISH TO YIELD MY TIME TO: CITY ZIP CODE NAME OF INDIVIDUAL DETACH AND SUBMIT TO THE CLERK OF THE BOARD DATE: /1- %. CHECK IF SUBJECT OF PUBLIC COMMENTS: ` PUBLIC COMMENTS: AGENDA ITEM NO.: SUBJECT OF (AS LISTED ON THE AGENDA) AGENDA ITEM: NAME: ADDRESS: C.-�k\C e�-1Kr7 PHONE NO.: cr. ( 7p b STREET REPRESENTING: CITY NAME OF AGENCY / ORGANIZATION / GROUP BUSINESS ADDRESS: PHONE NO.: STREET O I WISH TO YIELD MY TIME TO: CITY ZIP CODE NAME OF INDIVIDUAL DATE: / l /210 CHECK IF PUBLIC COMMENTS: ( AGENDA ITEM NO.: IAS LISTED ON THE AGENDA) NAME: J� ADDRESS: l 0l D STREET REPRESENTING: ,DETACH AND SUBMIT TO THE CLERK OF THE BOARD SUBJECT OF PUBLIC COMMENTS: / SUBJECT OF p l AGENDA ITEM: -» r\o nSo )0A.A/s7 h Ka ht C�-ry 7,2(.26 �a CITY NAME OF AGENCY / ORGANIZATION / GROUP BUSINESS ADDRESS: STREET r P ONE NO.: ' S-7-7'J30 PHONE NO.: ZIP CODE O I WISH TO YIELD MY TIME TO: CITY NAME OF INDIVIDUAL ZIP CODE DATE: III / CHECK IF SUBJECT OF 0.),PETACH AND SUBMIT TO THE CLERK OF THE BOARD /44fifq F" oCP MCP 0 N V Cr6/2. r9 PUBLIC COMMENTS: O PUBLIC COMMENTS: Qie.0 eem j Pricy / �f AGENDA ITEM NO.: (AS LISTED ON THE AGENDA) NAME: SUBJECT OF AGENDA ITEM: ,' c 001(0 5. �LL1Or- ADDRESS: (73Sn G".0SS STREET CITY REPRESENTING: tftsip�i\--7r V ��-t bre/A- NAME OF AGENCY /ARGANIZATION / GROUP BUSINESS ADDRESS: O I WISH TO YIELD MY s�i., STREET CITY TIME TO: PHONE NO.: �� ZIP CODE HONE NO.: Y5 -3 57 03\SZ NAME OF INDIVIDUAL ZIP CODE i I DETACH AND SUBMIT TO THE CLERK OF THE BOARD i ! DATE: � 6 a Q CHECK IF SUBJECT OF PUBLIC COMMENTS: ® PUBLIC COMMENTS: AGENDA ITEM NO.: SUBJECT OF (AS LISTED ON THE AGENDAI AGENDA ITEM: NAME: GE, i Q r) ylde n S O 1-1PHONE NO.: s 03(0()-'n23 ADDRESS: 1 l3%Q �-e yl a Lila, (K; I. a LOMOL ! / 7S-. STREET 1 CITY ZIP CODE REPRESENTING: 5-e_ I -0 PHONE NO.: NAME OF AGENCY / ORGANIZATION / GROUP BUSINESS ADDRESS: I 45 STREET O I WISH TO YIELD MY TIME TO: fn: coLAk fy dark Lucy CITY ZIP CODE NAME OF INDIVIDUAL / / DETACH ANC) w.giivli I 1 V I ht a.LChh WI I t i� uvv�Ir�. DATE: - / ,Z - v8 CHECK /SUBJECT OF PUBLIC C COMMENTS: PUBLIC COMMENTS: 4- AGENDA ITEM NO.: (AS LISTED ON THE AGENDA) SUBJECT OF '� 24.1---"z41'` Q'7%z AGENDA ITEM: NAME: �6-7/F 4 REPRESENTING: / /, ! / PHONE NO:: ,, / ADDRESS: J ZREET o y/6-LLr� e¢:</�I/N STCITY 5 ZIP CODE PHONE NO ft1-3Z- 2 a e? 7' Q,'Y NAME OF AGENCY / ORGANIZATION / GROUP BUSINESS ADDRESS: STREET O 1 WISH TO YIELD MY TIME TO: CITY NAME OF INDIVIDUAL ZIP CODE DATE: 11 ( I o8 CHECK IF PUBLIC COMMENTS: ut I AUH AND SUBMIT TO THE CLERK OF THE BOARD AGENDA ITEM NO.: (AS LISTED ON THE AGENDA) I8 SUBJECT OF ("� PUBLIC COMMENTS: tiia, courri. KLen . SUBJECT OF AGENDA ITEM: IA Cu Yof- Ilja HONE NO.:0 .5 CO n s1e, �c i�a)e., ►-tt,Ve, 111441.1gt Q CAP( CITY NAME: Lau ADDRESS: J9(69 STREE REPRESENTING: NAME OF AGENCY / ORGANIZATION / GROUP BUSINESS ADDRESS .- a j�� �(�� STREET -r r ( e, r-g O I WISH TO YIELD MY TIME TO: CITY NAME OF INDIVIDUAL qas i O ZIP CODE PHONE NO.: q5i *� Bb, 3)% ZIP CODE q,DETACH AND SUBMIT TO THE CLERK OF THE BOARD DATE: (j(..k ? kna �a7� 4400 CHECK IF PUBLIC COMMENTS: 0 AGENDA ITEM NO.: (AS LISTED ON THE AGENDA) lO SUBJECT OF I PUBLIC COMMENTS:eX tt 7`-0 L(440 / 00 71- P�� SUBJECT OF V AGENDA ITEM: NAME: )1 /it, a �/%�i -enG / P Q / n �/ ADDRESS: ! V 1 /.S -. v� B �Y' 126 • Ao;44 �/ Ta-S-7d 7 7 STREET / / ZIP CODE REPRESENTING: 6pe.ild y�e/�liderus,:dg //l�L, eatpH-7IVE NO.: NAME OF AGENCY / ORGANIZATION / ROUP BUSINESS ADDRESS: 4,- PHONE NO.:9S/ & S?- (o 6/a STREET CI I WISH TO YIELD MY TIME TO: CITY ZIP CODE NAME OF INDIVIDUAL L��T rneET c N , . O 1 o NOT DETACH AND SUBMIT TO THE CLERK OF THE BOARD DATE: li-/Z ~O� CHECK IF SUBJECT OF PUBLIC COMMENTS: O PUBLIC COMMENTS: AGENDA ITEM NO.: (AS LISTED ON THE AGENDA! J� SUBJECT OF AGENDA ITEM: /)e NAME: C e_o r q� �ul P PHONE NO.: 9,f REPRESENTING: %S./e �l ) b /"Ii,v, , 1.4 //c> (-o r, NAME OF AGENCY / ORGANIZATION / GROUP BUSINESS ADDRESS: PHONE NO.: STREET O I WISH TO YIELD MY TIME TO: CITY NAME OF INDIVIDUAL ZIP CODE SIERRA CLUB FOUNDED 1892 SAN GORGONIO CHAPTER 4079 Mission Inn Avenue Riverside, CA 92501 (951) 684-6203 Fax (951) 684-6172 Membership/Outings (951) 686-6112 Regional Groups Serving Riverside and San Bernardino Counties: Big Bear, Los Serranos, Mojave, Moreno Valley, Mountains, Tahquitz. November 12, 2008 Ms. Cathy Bechtel 75f-re- e—err; ""*"'" "` "T"" Manager of the Mid -County Parkway Re: Notice of Draft EI R/EIS The attached Press -Enterprise article dated July 18, 2008, about the Mid -County Parkway (MCP) raises serious health concerns for those whose homes, places of employment, schools, and places to recreate are within 1,500 feet of the MCP's ultimate width. It is not enough to say you addressed the required 300' distanced and put a few ads in the newspaper. I am certain none of those notices gave the information in USC and UCLA studies that show how living within 1,500 feet of a freeway will subject people to health problems, especially children and the elderly. The Sierra Club believes you must re -issue the availability of the MCP's Draft EIR/EIS to include all homes and places of employment within 1,500 feet of the MCP's ultimate width. All maps and documents must show and label schools and parks/dedicated open spaces within 1,500 feet. The Sierra Club also believes that the final EIR must have maps similar to what the Press -Enterprise article developed, showing the homes, places of employment, and lands within 1,500 feet of the ultimate width of the entire length of the MCP. Sincerely, George Hague Conservation Chair Moreno Valley Group of the Sierra Club 26711 Ironwood Avenue Moreno Valley, California 92555-1906 Phone: 951-924-0816 Fax: 951-924-4185 Comments 7 1 I Recommend °'' 4 While environmental studies are running late, an official says the proposed Mid -County Parkway is on schedule • Block `I Download story podcast 01:46 PM PDT on Friday, July 18, 2008 By DUG BEGLEY The Press -Enterprise Environmental studies for a west -central Riverside County route which officials stress is needed between San Jacinto and Corona won't be ready until late September, as the project battles opposition from its neighbors. Preliminary environmental reports on the proposed Mid -County Parkway were initially expected last month, when officials with the Riverside County Transportation Commission authorized them in 2007. Cathy Bechtel, project development director for the commission, said changes in how noise effects are studied and extra time needed to survey the route led to the three-month delay. "Overall, the project is still on schedule," she said. Transportation commissioners in September approved studying the route, identifying the southemmost alternative for a road that would tie the Ramona Expressway to Placentia Avenue in Perris, then cut through a relatively undeveloped area west of Perris before connecting to Cajalco Road in Corona. The 32-mile route is expected to cost $3.1 billion, Bechtel said. Considered by officials as the least bothersome to surrounding properties and natural areas, the preferred alternative requires removing 270 homes and businesses, a Perris city park and fire station, and cuts an eight -lane swath through the Gavilan Hills and Lake Mathews areas south of Riverside and west of Interstate 15. Completing preliminary environmental reports is only the beginning of the project, Bechtel said. The commission plans to hold public meetings, presumably in San Jacinto, Perris and Corona, after the drafts are made public. The commission is required to hold a public hearing on the draft during a regularly scheduled meeting as well, after a comment period of no fewer than 30 days. Story continues below MID -COUNTY PARKWAY: The proposed 32-mile route between San Jacinto and Corona traverses undeveloped areas, but most of the impact will be in Perris where the eight -lane parkway slices through existing commercial and residential development. r_ �111.M. Decent studies suggest living within 1,500 feet of a major roadway -I has health consequences. Along the Mid -County Parkway, hundreds of homes would be within that distance around Perris. Y c k. v' 11 Afil.etesed 0000000 i ••oo � y r CORONA 444 ...u�u e... n....•a. u.n w.••a1 ..auuyr.'.a".vt:.'u.•.'t4i• r•s.r7. Caialco Rd lead SptilHs 74 ; SOURCE: RIVERSIDE COUNTY IRANSPORTAE10N CANNISSb1,OGEE EARTHPRO _ BECK HACEMAN`1HEPIESSEN1ERPRISE (RUM CO. 1410'GO@li: PARKWAY: fne ereooxaj :-Jero.te tee+ser.San JJcfcle Jdxsrn eaerxr mx e.. oareas.os nsl of 1!!"pJ_I1TY tC N Porto MMS t'L t.,_ 1 WK 0.Vkali sket ex,i1Nef..- Ttroai LnJ iesivrtal.4..444enerr !> up, MAUL UtgOt htg ne!m 1560 fnaof ar-v a raat !us trim r .,,Cax•cx1. AYn; s`o 16!-0MIEFYkq{ C45 tatYXMS aaba De sa hn rut datrr_c arena x ns_ ii.�.eat4 Ntt.h[..i A, 7F:41"' PKs tua:tx IEfI' Ot•111-1 SyE 1•VA Click to enlarge Officials then alter the draft and submit it to state and federal officials. "We think we will have all the approvals we need in 2009," Bechtel said. What the commission doesn't have is all the funding. Officials have set aside $570 million that could be used on the project, but Bechtel said the parkway will likely be built in stages as funding allows. Opposing Traffic The project has been slow to receive support from neighbors of the proposed route. They say the path the commission favored from the outset will ruin their quiet communities and bring unwanted pollution to pristine areas of central Riverside County. "If they suggested putting a freeway through Riverside in a residential area with expensive homes, there would be an outrage," said parkway critic George Hague. "But for some reason they think they can plow through the city of Perris." Hague, conservation chairman of the Sierra Club's Moreno Valley group, said many residents along the route worry that building an eight -lane road through the area will only increase development there. County transportation commission deputy director John Standiford disagreed. Growth Demand "I think you need this road even if there isn't a lot of growth," Standiford said. Often projects are questioned for encouraging development, he added, but road planners are usually responding to planned development. Growth in Perris and San Jacinto continued unabated until the recent housing slowdown, Standiford said, although the Mid -County Parkway didn't exist. "The demand is there today," Standiford said. "And it will be there in the future, too." But residents argue there could be a better route. Cynthia Ferry, of the Gavilan Hills area, said while an east -west route is needed, the route preferred by the county transportation commission has flaws. Ferry said the road will become a popular thoroughfare for trucks on their way to I-215 and the former March Air Force Base, but the route's slope will force truckers to constantly brake as they come through Gavilan Hills and head downhill. "They just don't want the pollution and all the noise that comes with it," she said of residents. Reach Dug Begley at 951-368-9475 or dbeglev@PE.com Parkway Progress Construction can begin on the Mid -County Parkway by 2011, though a preliminary report on the project's environmental impact has been delayed three months. The schedule is as follows. September 2008: Draft environmental reports October -November 2008: Public hearings to discuss environmental reports July 2009: Final environmental report 2010: Final design of project and property acquisition 2011: Construction begins 2016: Construction completed Source: Riverside County Transportation Commission November 3 rd 2008 Ms Cathy Bechtel RCTC P.O. Box 12008 Riverside, Ca. 92502-2208 Subject: Mid County Parkway Reference: Public meeting on October 28' 2008 which we attended Dear Ms Bechtel I was surprised to see the proposed on/off ramps at corner of Gavilan Road and Parkway was eliminated since it was shown on previous documents given to public and shown at public meetings etc. I caught this revision because my residence is close to this intersection and planned on using it to access parkway. Should this revision be pointed out in future meetings so public knows about it? Why wasn't this major revision pointed out in Volume 6 Oct. 2008 public literature where locally preferred 9(TWSDV) revisions are discussed. It's possible that a large amount of the public that would want to use Gavilan Road to access parkway do not know it has been eliminated . As you know some of the residents in Gavilan Hills are upset about the parkway, but I assume if it goes thru as proposed they will want to be able to easily use it. I believe the on/off ramp at Gavilan Road should be put back on proposal # 9 parkway for the following reasons: For emergency response. The Fire Department that is near intersection of Gavilan Road and Cajalco would be called in case of accident/fires etc and without access at Gavilan Road/ parkway it would greatly increase their response time. Is there a Fire Department proposed for the Gavilan Hills area? I assume without Gavilan Road access Lake Mathews Drive to Cajalco would have to be widened which would be difficult/costly to do and it would be a steep road and houses probably would have to be removed. Has public been notified of this possibility? How does staff visualize residents on Harley John, Wood Road etc areas accessing parkway? There is a large area that would be serviced if on/off ramps were at Gavilan Road. With out it hundreds of residents would be denied easy access to partway. Most of existing population is i.n Gavilan Road/Harley John, Wood Road etc area's. I believe county long range outlook for Gavilan Hills Road is to be a major secondary road. It goes from Cajalco Road to Highway 74 with many residents using it. page 1of 2 This proposed # 9 parkway will greatly impact our property ( noise/view etc ) and we would be better off if it did not follow # 9 route but if it is built using proposed # 9 route we would like to be able to easily use it. Thank you for your consideration. Sincerely Charles H. And Patricia Pearson 17075 Multiview Drive (corner of Gavilan Road) Perris, Ca. 92570 951-789-4809 Cell 951-743-8603 Please enter my letter into public record and have it reviewed by the appropriate staff. CC: Mr. Tay Dam Federal Highway Administration 650 Capitol Mall, Suite 4-100 Sacramento, Ca. 95814-4708 page 2 OF 2 DETACH AND SUBMIT TO THE CLERK OF THE BOARD DATE: 7//2 JD, CHECK IF PUBLIC COMMENTS: 121 SUBJECT OF % PUBLIC COMMENTS: i 1,--i4/.li4/1/ ®G /i��Xt;pa_ i�eli'" AGENDA ITEM NO.: (AS LISTED ON THE AGENDA) /1! NAME: e,.4)4407./l� ��®77,1 ADDRESS: /� Tl e al die r7 STREET�9 r,rDA„,y/if�..4, %%. REPRESENTING: .� L.f� NAME OF AGENCY / ORGANIZATION / GROUP BUSINESS ADDRESS: 4 riy S EET O 1 WISH TO YIELD MY TIME TO: NAME OF INDIVIDUAL SUBJECT OF A . AGENDA ITEM: ra4Lie 4411-f:i.d 4a /17(r, PHONE NO.: A/- "�i7 ZIaf7z, /07 CITY PHONE NO.: D\ a NoT sPePt CIA At READ Le-r-rE e,. ZIP CODE Post Office Box 51389 Riverside, California 92517-2389 November 12, 2008 Riverside County Transportation Commission Post Office Box 12008 Riverside, California 92502-2208 Subject: Request for Extension of Time Please consider this letter as a request for an extension of time to permit the general public's review of the Environmental Impact Report (EIR) for the Mid County Parkway (MCP). Inasmuch as RCTC and associated agencies have taken several years to prepare the EIR, please consider an extension of at least 30 days and preferably longer. An inadequate review period would circumvent the intent of the NEPA and CEQA process to provide decision makers with meaningful input regarding the MCP project. Thank you for your consideration of this request. Respectfully, John W. Roth